Tactile paving on platforms on the London Underground

Caroline Pidgeon: The TfL publication‘Your accessible transport network - Our commitment to making it even easier for you to travel around London’ in its May 2015 update states that tactile paving was in place at 695 of 711 platforms on the Tube network. Please provide an update on the current level of provision, stating the remaining London Underground stations which do not have platform tactile paving.

The Mayor: All platforms on the London Underground network have tactile paving, with the exception of:
Network Rail is currently developing a programme of works to install tactile paving across its network, and these sites are included in the scope. Further detail on timescales for the above stations may be obtained from Network Rail.

Deputy Mayor's Views

Keith Prince: In October 2020 your Deputy Mayor for Transport stated that she could not “see how it’s right tocharge people £15 to drive a mile from Wandsworth to Clapham, or Catford to Lewisham from October next year.” Do you agree with your Deputy Mayor?

Sadiq Khan: My Deputy Mayor [for Transport] made the remarks that have been referred to in response to the Government’s proposal to extend the Congestion Charge to the North and South Circular Roads to address the funding shortfall at TfL. This proposal would have increased the size of the Congestion Charge Zone by 18 times to cover all of inner London and would have brought an additional 4million Londoners into the Congestion Charge area. A £15 charge for every journey by car in this area would not have been appropriate or proportionate. My Deputy Mayor was rightly pointing out that trips in Catford or Clapham should not be treated in the same way as trips in the busiest parts of central London. The Government wanted to introduce this expansion on top of the planned expansion of the ULEZ. That would have led to some Londoners paying £27.50 for short journeys at a time when household and business finances were under serious strain. I agreed with my Deputy Mayor and I am pleased that we were able to see off this crude and punitive proposal.
This episode was sadly indicative of the approach the Government has taken in the TfL funding discussions. I really hope that when we come to the CSR, we can have a more constructive discussion about the long-term funding deal London needs. I am committed to extending the ULEZ to inner London this October [2021]. This is a charge for only the most polluting vehicles. ULEZ-compliant vehicles will pay no charge. The ULEZ is a fundamentally different scheme to the Congestion Charge, tackling the pollution that has blighted many parts of our city for so long. Four out of five cars regularly driving in the expanded ULEZ are now compliant and therefore will not pay.
I am pleased to have set up a vehicle scrappage scheme to help those on low incomes, charities and disabled Londoners to purchase a compliant vehicle and to have previously offered a scheme to help small businesses. It is disappointing that the Government has not yet supported London’s scrappage scheme in the same way it has for similar schemes in Birmingham and Bath. However, I hope the Government will match my commitment and fund a targeted national scrappage scheme soon.

Keith Prince: It seems a little bit strange that £15 is too much, but £12.50 is just right. Do you agree, MrMayor, that that £12.50 will probably hit those least able to afford it? How do you make that add up?

Sadiq Khan: It is quite simple, really. The Congestion Charge applies to all vehicles, basically, with some very minor exceptions. The ULEZ applies to a minority of vehicles, those that are not compliant; in other words, EuroVI or EuroIV depending on what sort of fuel is being used. At the moment we know from the latest figures we have that 87% of vehicles that come into the central London ULEZ are compliant. Of the Congestion Charge vehicles that come into central London, many of them pay the charge because very few of them are exempt. That is the big difference.

Keith Prince: You have acknowledged - in fact even yesterday you acknowledged - that it is going to be those people who are less able to afford the charge who are going to be the ones who are hit by the charge. How do you square that with your socialist beliefs?

Sadiq Khan: That is one of the reasons why we have been lobbying the Government for some time for a national diesel scrappage scheme. It begs the question: why do poor people living in Birmingham get support from the Government but not poor people in London? Why do poor people in Bath get support from the Government but not poor people in London? I am quite clear that the issue of air quality is an issue of social justice. The reality is that the poorest Londoners, least likely to own a car, suffer the worst-quality air. In the expanded ULEZ - in other words, in inner London - six out of 10 Londoners do not own a car because they are poorer Londoners, but they suffer the consequences of the poor air quality, generated largely by polluting vehicles.

Keith Prince: As you have been reminded before, it is not for us to answer questions from you, but I will happily answer the question as to why people in Bath and Birmingham get a better deal from the Government: perhaps they have a Mayor who is better at negotiating than you are. All I would say, though, MrMayor, is that you are going to hit poor people. You have identified that your solution, of course, is for them to go out and buy another car. Do you honestly think that people who cannot afford to pay £12.50 are going to be able to afford to buy a new car? Or is it perhaps, MrMayor, a case of, as there is no bread, let them eat cake.

Sadiq Khan: The points you are making are the reasons we have been lobbying the Government for a national diesel scrappage scheme: to help those who still need their car and cannot afford to make the conversion required, and cannot for good reasons give up their vehicle altogether. We are working to encourage more people to not have polluting vehicles. The ‘polluter pays’ principle is one I subscribe to. If you have a vehicle that is emitting nitrogen dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and carbon emissions, and you are causing children to have stunted lungs and adults to have a whole host of health issues from asthma to cancer to heart disease, you should be aware of the consequences of what you are doing. If you are unwilling to change your car or give up your car, pay extra.
What we are saying to the Government is that we recognise there are some poorer Londoners, some disabled Londoners, some small businesses and micro businesses and some charities who may need assistance. In the absence of Government support, we have managed to find £56million. We could find even more if there were not big strings attached to the deal with the Government.
If you are saying that the reason the Government has done a better deal with Bath and Birmingham is because their respective Mayors are better negotiators than us, then I am more than happy to take up your advice and ask them how they negotiated. What I am not willing to do is to join the Conservative party to get a better deal for London.

Keith Prince: MrMayor, we would not have you, but thank you very much indeed.

Riverlinx (2)

Elly Baker: How are Riverlinx minimising the air quality impact of work happening at Silvertown?

The Mayor: Please see my response to Mayor’s Question 2021/2608.

Williams-Shapps review

Caroline Pidgeon: The Williams-Shapps review specifically highlighted TfL’s operating model, yet TfL has not been devolved any further powers over rail within greater London. How will you and TfL continue to make the case to government for such powers?

The Mayor: The Williams-Shapps review endorsed the use of passenger service contracts of the type used by Transport for London (TfL). This is a welcome development which demonstrates the success of TfL’s model for the management of train services. TfL will therefore continue to work with the Department for Transport and its agents, including Great British Railways, on the transfer of the Great Northern services from Moorgate over to TfL. Given the future use of the concession style of contract, TfL will be engaging on the basis that it can bring greater integration between modes, of customer information and with the planning process to leverage funds for enhancements and support new housing. These are all key objectives cited in the Williams-Shapps review.

e-scooters (1)

Caroline Pidgeon: Please set out what steps TfL has taken to consult and involve blind and visually impaired people relating to the recently commenced e-scooter hire trial?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) has carried out a significant programme of research and engagement to understand the views and concerns of stakeholders from diverse communities and the possible impacts of the rental e-scooter trial on people with protected characteristics, including those who are blind or visually impaired.
This programme has helped inform TfL’s Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA), available here https://content.tfl.gov.uk/rental-escooter-trial-2021.pdf, which details all engagement undertaken up until the end of May 2021 including with Guide Dogs UK, RNIB and London Vision. TfL also joined a Ministerial roundtable with representatives from the sight loss sector and an event on rental e-scooters hosted by Guide Dogs UK in mid-June to build on the engagement to date. The impacts of the trial will be kept under ongoing review.
TfL remains committed to engaging with these groups, and all groups who may be impacted, throughout the trial to ensure impacts are being monitored, taken into account and addressed wherever possible.

e-scooters (2)

Caroline Pidgeon: Please state in detail how TfL will publish the information it receives from the e-scooter trial relating to complaints and observations about user behaviour that are obtained via the website link: https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/e-scooter-trial

The Mayor: The feedback provided on Transport for London’s (TfL) website https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/e-scooter-trial is already available to view by members of the public in its submitted form and will continue to be available and monitored throughout the trial.
TfL is also in the process of agreeing a way forward on the approach to validating key trial data with all delivery partners, including operators, London boroughs, London Councils, the Metropolitan Police Service and the Department for Transport, with a view to publishing high level trial data.
The insights gathered will be used to:

SNT Ward Panels (2)

Emma Best: Will the Mayor commit to reviewing how well SNT Ward Panels function and engage with local communities?

The Mayor: As part of my Action Plan for Transparency, Accountability and Trust in Policing I have committed to a review of community engagement structures. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has signed up to the Plan and is closely involved in developing the review, which will consider the variety of engagement mechanisms across my Office for Policing and Crime and the MPS, including ward panels.

SNT Ward Panels

Emma Best: How many wards in London have a functioning SNT Ward Panel?

The Mayor: The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) have advised that 608 of the 632 wards across London currently have a functioning ward panel. Ward Panels provide an important mechanism for local consultation and ensure that the work of each neighbourhood policing team maintains focus on resolving local problems by involving local people in the process of prioritising the concerns of the community.
The MPS works to ensure every ward has a panel in place and has conducted more focused work over the last year with a view to enhancing and maximising their effectiveness. The MPS is committed to every ward having a useful and effective ward panel and will continue to work to ensure the efficacy of the panels at local level.

EU Londoners

Marina Ahmad: Has the Government listened to your concerns regarding the backlog in applications for the EU Settlement Scheme and the evidence indicating that the most vulnerable in societyare in the greatest danger of slipping through the cracks meaning that tens of thousands of EU citizens could become undocumented and vulnerable to discrimination?

Sadiq Khan: EU Londoners are part of the fabric of this city and we must do everything we can to help them feel welcome and valued. London remains open to them all, despite Brexit. I am proud of the efforts my team has made, working with lawyers and community and civil society groups as well as ordinary Londoners to help European Londoners apply ahead of the 30June [2021] EU Settlement Scheme deadline.
Disappointingly, the Home Office has not yet addressed our concerns about the number of outstanding applications, nor listened to calls to extend the application deadline. This remains my number one call on the Government on this matter. With the deadline fast approaching, it is increasingly clear that a significant number of people risk losing their entitlements and becoming undocumented and subject to hostile environment immigration policies. The latest Home Office stats show that over 330,000 people are still waiting for the outcome of their applications, with more than 100,000 of these in London. Many are already at risk of discrimination from an employer, landlord or other essential service.
I am working proactively with the Government to prevent miscommunication and misinformation about the rights and entitlements of European Londoners. Through the European Londoners Hub, we have ensured that comprehensive guidance and information about the EU Settlement Scheme and EU citizens’ rights is available to European Londoners and their families in 28 community languages. We have also invested in specialist support to reach out to those most at risk of losing out. Home Office funding for organisations supporting vulnerable EU citizens to apply to the scheme has been essential to ensure those most at risk are not left behind. I am therefore urging the Government to commit to extending that funding beyond September [2021].

Marina Ahmad: Thank you, MrMayor. As you know, during the Windrush scandal, the UK Government deported or threatened to deport the children of Commonwealth citizens who, despite living and working in the UK for decades, were told that they were here illegally because of a lack of official papers. You spoke about working with the Home Office. Have you had any kind of response from the Government in your calls to extend the EU Settlement Scheme deadline or at the very least attempt to avoid another Windrush scandal, which would leave EU Londoners undocumented and cut off from seeking NHS treatment?

Sadiq Khan: The Government this week on the floor of the House of Commons confirmed it would not be giving an extension beyond 30June [2021]. Just to underline the point you are making, these are people who are undocumented or have had their status unregularised, even though they are entitled to be here, stay here and so forth. That is why we have said to the Government that we know there is a backlog and we know some people who have applied and have not yet had their status processed. You are right to give the example. It is possible from 1July [2021] that in the provision of services or the provision of a landlord or an employer, you could be treated in a less advantageous way because of the uncertainty caused through no fault of your own. That is why we will continue to ask the Government to extend the deadline but, in the meantime, it is really important that anybody who is not registered registers before 30June and we can later on persuade the Government to process the applications quicker.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you, MrMayor. Has the Government at least responded to your call for a cast-iron guarantee that any delays in processing the applications of applicants will not lead to EU Londoners or their families losing their status or being discriminated against from next week?

Sadiq Khan: No, it has not. Let me tell you why it is important. From next week, if you are employer, you will be concerned, “Am I breaking the law? Will I face a fine if the person I take on has a status that is not commensurate with what the law requires?” Similarly, when it comes to the provision of services and so forth. That is why we are saying to the Government that it is really important it gives some certainty to those Londoners who are EU citizens about what their status is after 30June, and also to avoid a situation where somebody may be not intentionally discriminating but, because they do not want to be guilty of breaking the law, treats somebody less favourably because of their status. It is really important for the Government to learn the lessons from the Windrush scandal, as you talked about.

Marina Ahmad: Thank you very much, MrMayor.

Street drinking in Brent and Harrow

Krupesh Hirani: What specific measures are the Metropolitan Policeintroducing to enforce against street drinking in public spaces within my constituency?

The Mayor: North West Basic Command Unit works closely with local authority partners in Harrow and Brent to tackle street drinking and Anti-Social Behaviour. Joint patrols are conducted with officers from the Local Authority and Neighbourhood Policing Teams in targeted hot spot areas to enforce the Harrow and Brent Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs). Harrow has recently reissued a borough-wide PSPOs to tackle street drinking. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) share information with Community Safety Teams as a matter of course and issue Community Protection Notice Warnings or signpost individuals to the drug and alcohol services where necessary. Local authorities use a ‘can marking scheme’ which helps the MPS identify shops that are selling alcohol to street drinkers. Environmental Visual Audits take place in locations to identify factors increasing the use of areas by street drinkers and designing these out where appropriate. The MPS are also working with street pastors to help assist vulnerable members of the public.

London’s retail and hospitality sector

Krupesh Hirani: How are you supporting London’s retail and hospitality sectors this summer?

Sadiq Khan: London’s retail and hospitality sectors have been hit hard by the pandemic, forced closed for many months, and even now they are being squeezed by the need for social distancing and a significant loss of footfall, particularly in central London. Pre-pandemic, these sectors were a big part of what made London so special and I am determined that that will be true for years to come.
While we are not out of the woods yet, we are now able to enjoy retail and hospitality safely and I am urging Londoners and visitors from across the country to experience all our city has to offer this summer. That is why I launched Let’s Do London, the capital’s largest ever domestic tourism campaign, designed to drive footfall and spending across our city. London Eats, the first phase of Let’s Do London, focused on the city’s diverse food and drink offer and there is more to come, including a summer of family fun and London Lates events at London tourist destinations.
As restaurants and other hospitality venues start to reopen, many businesses are struggling to recruit chefs and other key roles, in part because of European Union (EU) workers having returned to their countries of origin during the pandemic. I have backed the hospitality sector’s calls for a COVID recovery visa and I will be using my Skills Academy programme to train up more Londoners with the skills they need to take up jobs in hospitality, among other sectors. I will continue to lobby the Government on behalf of the retail and hospitality sectors, advised by the COVID-19 Business Forum, which I chair.
In light of the recent extension of COVID restrictions, I am urging the Government to extend the vital financial support that our businesses need until the final lifting of restrictions. It is right that the Government has now confirmed that it will extend protections from business evictions to next March [2022], as the forum and I asked, but it is not enough. Businesses need further extensions to the 100% business rates holiday and the continuation of the existing furlough scheme at current rates.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you, MrMayor, and I welcome the Let’s Do London campaign, a really stark contrast to the Government’s ‘Let’s Do London Over’ efforts as well.
You have long called for business rates reform, which has been delayed with the findings of the review to be published this autumn. What engagement have you had with the review and are you confident that specific business rates issues affecting London in particular will be addressed by the Government’s review?

Sadiq Khan: This is a good example of cross-party support. I was really pleased to see the comments from NickieAiken, the MP for Westminster, yesterday in relation to her experience as the Leader of Westminster Council and a Londoner about how the business rates model is broken, particularly because many of our businesses pay a significant business rates level and do not qualify for the various thresholds the Government has. It is really important for the Government to fix business rates, particularly for retail, because we have seen people shopping more online. Overheads are less, business rates are less and the tax regime is different. I am hopeful that the Treasury understands the real concerns raised, amplified by the pandemic. I am really happy to work cross-party with other parties across London to make the case for our city that business rates are broken and need fixing.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you. You will be aware of the business rates holiday extension, and I am aware of your efforts to lobby the Government on this matter as well. I am wondering if you have a sense of how businesses are feeling at the moment and whether you are jointly working with London’s businesses to lobby that point to the Government as well. Put yourself in the shoes of restaurant owners; if they have to distance their tables, even after the four-week delay if COVID restrictions need to be in place, it is going to be very difficult for many businesses and venues to be at full capacity. What efforts have you been making alongside businesses to the Government on this matter?

Sadiq Khan: Like you, I spend lots of time speaking to businesses and the reality is that one out of five businesses in hospitality have not reopened. Unless they are allowed to remove restrictions and reopen properly on 19July [2021], some may never open again. That is why it is so important for all of us to do what we can to help us reopen on 19July, get the first jab and the second jab, follow the rules, and also ensure that the Government understands the needs of our businesses. The fact that business rates relief has gone from 100% relief to 66% means businesses have to find the additional 34% without some of them having reopened, or with some of them having reopened but making a loss. Similarly, to contribute an additional 10% to the furlough scheme is often more than they can afford. That is why we have been lobbying the Government with businesses on a cross-party basis to continue the business support as there has been an extension of the current lockdown. We are hopeful to reopen on 19July and we will continue to lobby the Government with businesses to give our businesses support.

Krupesh Hirani: Thank you. No further questions.

Park Lane Congestion

Tony Devenish: What independent analysis has been done on the cost to London’s economy of increased congestion on Park Lane since May 2020?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) is actively monitoring traffic levels in and around the Park Lane area and is aware of recent increases in congestion. TfL has been investigating the reasons for these additional delays and is looking at practical and effective solutions that can be introduced quickly in order to improve journeys for all road users. I am confident that improvements can be made.

Impacts of E-scooters on Londoners with Sight Loss

Tony Devenish: How are you ensuring you fully consider the impacts of the E-scooter trials on the 213,000 Londoners with sight loss?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) has carried out a significant programme of research and engagement to understand the views and concerns of stakeholders from diverse communities and the possible impacts of the rental e-scooter trial on people with protected characteristics, including those who are blind or visually impaired.
This programme has helped inform TfL’s Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA), available here https://content.tfl.gov.uk/rental-escooter-trial-2021.pdf, which includes details of the engagement undertaken up until the end of May 2021 including with groups representing individuals who are blind and visually impaired. TfL also joined a Ministerial roundtable with representatives from the sight loss sector and an event on rental e-scooters hosted by Guide Dogs UK in mid-June, to build on the engagement to date. The impacts of the trial will be kept under ongoing review.
TfL remains committed to engaging with these groups and all groups who may be impacted, throughout the trial to ensure impacts are being monitored, taken into account and addressed wherever possible.

Manifesto Delivery

Susan Hall: How confident are you about delivering on your manifesto over the next three years?

Sadiq Khan: For the second time, I was humbled by the massive faith Londoners put in me at the ballot box with a record-breaking vote. This gives me a clear mandate again to get on and deliver for them and I am confident that we will do just that.
This has meant hitting the ground running with our priorities for London in these challenging times. Top of the list is getting London back on its feet as we recover from the effects of the pandemic. Whilst we are not out of the woods yet, if we all continue to follow the rules, we are close to restrictions being fully lifted, enabling us to head to a type of normality. London’s businesses need our support now more than ever and so I have launched the biggest domestic tourism campaign London has ever seen and I am encouraging Londoners to enjoy their city safely this summer. With Euro2020 in full swing, there is a real feeling of positivity about the city and I want to keep that feeling going this summer and beyond. TfL is running a clean, safe and efficient service to support that and the Waterloo & City line has reopened ahead of schedule.
As we begin to reopen, it is important that we create opportunities that will help us to build back better. The Green New Deal, in which we are investing £50million over the next three years, will create sustainable jobs to help move our economy towards our zero-carbon goal. Our Good Work for All Fund, in which we are investing £32million over the next three years, will create Skills Academies in key sectors to provide opportunities for the young Londoners who have been hit so hard by the pandemic. We are on track to hit our target for affordable housing delivery with over 13,000 affordable homes started last year, despite the pandemic and Brexit.
Working with the MPS and the Violence Reduction Unit, we will continue to bear down on violence, being tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. This summer, Londoners will see MPS Violence Suppression Units on the streets in areas known for serious violence and gang activity. We have already put more money into the DIVERT and London Gang Exit programmes than ever before.
There is nothing I take more seriously, Chair, than my commitment to Londoners. I am determined to deliver for them in this second term, just as I was when I was first elected five years ago.

Susan Hall: Thank you, MrMayor. Your Chief of Staff told the Budget and Performance Committee on 15June [2021] that an internal analysis was underway to group your commitments into three broad categories: those that are already in the budget, those that are broadly in the budget but which need to change focus, and those that are not in the budget. When do you expect this work to conclude?

Sadiq Khan: It will take some time, because some of them are over three years and so they will happen in years 2022/23. Some will happen in 2023/24. You will appreciate that the manifesto is a political document and now we are asking GLA civil servants to turn the manifesto into a workstream over the next three years.

Susan Hall: Yes. Somewhat concerningly, your Chief of Staff did not recognise the more than 280 pledges that the Budget and Performance Committee had discovered. He also did tell us that he is happy to work with the Committee as we baseline your commitments for monitoring or tracking purposes. He said, “I can see great merit to having, if you like, a single version of the truth there”. Is that something you would welcome, us establishing a set of benchmarks against your manifesto progress so that we can monitor and assess it?

Sadiq Khan: That would even maybe help us. I am more than happy to.

Susan Hall: Excellent. I look forward to holding you to that.

Sadiq Khan: I am always happy to work with you.

Susan Hall: Yes, I have noticed, MrMayor. I have noticed. The Chief of Staff told us that the manifesto was written by the Mayor with the financial situation in mind. Is that correct?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. Unlike some other manifestos, mine was realistic and deliverable.

Susan Hall: We are talking about yours, MrMayor, because it is MQT, as we keep reminding you. Was there any engagement with the GLA officers in the creation of your manifesto? My understanding is that there are broad discussions here and there between political parties and the civil service before a general election.

Sadiq Khan: I am not clear on what you are asking.

Susan Hall: Have you had some conversations with GLA staff about your manifesto in order to make sure that what you are promising is deliverable?

Sadiq Khan: No, I did not ask officers to advise me on the manifesto, if that is what is being suggested.

Susan Hall: If there is not money for your pledges, that is absolutely down to you?

Sadiq Khan: No, the way it works is a manifesto is a political document and when you are elected‑‑

Susan Hall: Yes, I know. I understand. I also understand that if you get elected in on a manifesto, you have to do your level best to make sure you can deliver that manifesto. Having established that it is nothing to do with the GLA officers and you have done it on your own, if you do not deliver your manifesto, is it on your head?

Sadiq Khan: Well, most manifestos are on the head of the politician who stands on the manifesto.

Susan Hall: Good. You accept that. All right. On that note, we can end. Thank you, MrMayor.

Rerouting the A2 and A6 National Express Services

Tony Devenish: Westminster Council has for some time been seeking to persuade TfL to reroute the A2 and A6 National Express services so that they use Eastbourne Terrace instead of Westbourne Terrace. Will you personally intervene to ensure this change happens as soon as possible?

The Mayor: I can confirm that changes are underway to the A6 route, operated by National Express, to avoid Westbourne Terrace east of Bishops Bridge Road under normal service conditions. There is, however, a formal process that needs to take place before this change is fully implemented. Transport for London has checked the A2 and found it is not normally routed via Westbourne Terrace.

E-Scooter Engagement

Tony Devenish: How have you engaged with Guide Dogs, RNIB and London Vision in relation to E-scooter trials in London?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) has carried out a significant programme of research and engagement to understand the views and concerns of stakeholders from diverse communities and the possible impacts of the rental e-scooter trial on people with protected characteristics, including those who are blind or visually impaired.
This programme has helped inform TfL’s Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA), available here https://content.tfl.gov.uk/rental-escooter-trial-2021.pdf, which details all engagement undertaken up until the end of May 2021 including with Guide Dogs UK, RNIB and London Vision. TfL also joined a Ministerial roundtable with representatives from the sight loss sector and an event on rental e-scooters hosted by Guide Dogs UK in mid-June to build on the engagement to date. The impacts of the trial will be kept under ongoing review.
TfL remains committed to engaging with these groups, and all groups who may be impacted, throughout the trial to ensure impacts are being monitored, taken into account and addressed wherever possible.

Disability Employment Gap

Tony Devenish: 81.2% ofnon-disabled people are in work compared to just 52.6% of disabled people. What haveyou done to change this worrying statistic over the last 5 years and what are your targets for reducing this over the next 3 years?

Sadiq Khan: The employment rate for disabled Londoners is not as high as it should be. I am committed to working with disabled Londoners, the boroughs and other partners across London to help disabled and other vulnerable Londoners to find and progress in work.
We are also working with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) on this and we are working with the Government to do more to support us to improve outcomes for all Londoners. Despite very limited statutory powers and resources, over the last five years we have already invested in a number of initiatives to help more disabled Londoners into work. Through the London Economic Action Partnership’s (LEAP) European Social Fund programme, we have used £55million to match fund the Work and Health programme in London. This borough-led programme will help up to 55,000 disabled Londoners and other long-term unemployed groups to get the support they need to move into work by 2022.
Since taking control of the Adult Education Budget (AEB) in 2019, we have made training more accessible for disabled Londoners, including fully funding British Sign Language courses for Deaf learners. During the 2019/20 academic year, around 30,000 learners with a self-declared learning difficulty, disability or health programme participated in our AEB programme. Working with TfL, we have also supported Steps into Work, a 12-month work placement scheme, which offers people with learning disabilities the chance to gain skills and work experience.
We will continue to support disabled Londoners as we recover from the pandemic. This includes championing the Good Work Standard and promoting the Employment Rights Hub to Londoners, providing information about rights for disabled workers. The Careers Hub we recently launched will build on the London Enterprise Adviser Network, further extending career support to all colleges and secondary schools in London, including special schools, so that young Londoners with special needs can get a better start in life. We are also working with the DWP and London Councils to better coordinate skills and employment programmes for Londoners most in need, including disabled Londoners. This includes establishing a ‘no wrong door’ approach, so that Londoners get the right support at the right time.
Finally, Chair, our £32million Good Work for All Fund also aims to support the most vulnerable Londoners, including disabled Londoners, get the skills they need to progress and to work in sectors key to London’s recovery.

Tony Devenish: Good morning, MrMayor. In the last three years, two of my fellow Assembly colleagues and the Economy Committee have all written or asked you questions about this very important subject. The main recommendation of all three - not one, not two, but all three - was that you set up a disability employment taskforce. Will you do so, please?

Sadiq Khan: You will be pleased to know that the [London] Recovery Board has set up a taskforce looking at the issue of structural inequalities, which includes disabled Londoners.

Tony Devenish: Would you agree that if you are Mayor for eight years, which you are going to be, if half of disabled Londoners are still without a job, you will have failed?

Sadiq Khan: That is one of the reasons we are working with the DWP to make sure that, working with the Government, we address this really important issue. It is really easy - which I know is a temptation for you - to point a finger at the Mayor. This is an example where actually there should be cross-party working and also central, regional and local government working to address this issue.
The gamechanger for us is the fact that we are now in charge of the AEB. You have heard the good news in relation to fully funding the signers, and we are going to continue to make progress.
The Government recognises that this pandemic has both illustrated and also exacerbated some of the inequalities that already existed in our society. Disabled Londoners are one group that has suffered disproportionately from the pandemic. I am keen to make progress on this issue over the next few weeks, let alone the next three years.

Tony Devenish: I agree with you that we do need to have cross-party working, including with the Government, but will you set a specific target in terms of what percentage of disabled Londoners will not have a job at the end of your eight years?

Sadiq Khan: I am happy, Chair, to ask the Good Work for All mission to look at whether it is realistic to set targets in relation to this area. Just so you know, one of the factors outside our control is what happens to unemployment. You will know that one of the things we are trying to avoid is the mass unemployment we saw in the 1980s. There are three parts of that: to protect the jobs we have, to support the creation of new jobs, as well as to support those who lose their jobs get back into work as soon as possible. A lot of these things are outside the control of City Hall. Let’s Do London is about a rapid recovery. If we get a rapid recovery, it makes it more likely we can be supporting more disabled Londoners rather than less likely.

Tony Devenish: Could you set a target in terms of disabled Londoners who would have jobs with the GLA group organisations?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am more than happy for the functional groups’ meeting, which meets regularly, to raise this issue in relation to them. That includes TfL, MPS, the London Fire Brigade (LFB) and the Development Corporations (DCs). I can ask them to look into this.

Tony Devenish: Thank you very much, Chair.

Supreme Court ruling on Uber drivers

Caroline Pidgeon: The Supreme Court ruling on the 19 February 2021 stated that the employment tribunal was entitled to find the time spent by claimants for Uber was not limited (as Uber argued) to periods when they were actually driving passengers to their destinations, but included any period when the driver was logged into the Uber app within the territory in which the driver was licensed to operate and was ready and willing to accept trips.
Please set out in detail how TfL is seeking to ensure this legal ruling is fully enforced and what steps it is taking to monitor its enforcement.

The Mayor: As I said at the time of the ruling, I welcome the Supreme Court decision. Gig economy workers deserve the same rights as other workers.
However, I am aware that, as the licensing authority and regulator of taxi and private hire services, Transport for London (TfL) does not have the ability to stipulate the employment terms and conditions used by private hire operators.
As has been demonstrated by the Supreme Court decision, drivers have a clear legal recourse through the employment tribunals system if they consider an employer is not playing by the rules.
TfL brought this ruling to the attention of licensees in TPH Notice 05/21.

Solar energy at Crossrail stations on national rail network

Caroline Pidgeon: What plans does Crossrail have, working with Network Rail, to install UV film on the canopies at the Crossrail stations on the rail network, similar to those recently installed at Denmark Hill station?

The Mayor: Delivery of the Elizabeth line is in the final, complex stages, with the majority of station enhancement works on the east and west ends of the line now complete. There are a small number of stations where works remain, but they are at an advanced phase and the existing scope of work does not include the installation of UV film to canopies. Completion of the works at the remaining stations is expected before the opening of the central section in the first half of 2022.
Transport for London aims to always deliver solar power when new buildings are constructed, such as the recently installed 173kWp solar array on the roof of the Train Modification Unit at Acton. Meanwhile, London Underground’s private wire project aims to contract with renewable generators to power the Tube with directly connected solar in London.

Prioritising Early Years Programmes

Emma Best: Are Early Years Programmes a priority for your mayoralty?

Sadiq Khan: It is vital that all London’s children get the best start in life, and I will continue to do what I can to help children succeed and thrive.
Despite very limited powers, we achieved a lot in my first term upon which we will continue to build. Our Healthy Years London programme has supported over 2,000 early years providers since 2018 to develop a whole-setting approach to improving children’s outcomes. We also learned from our Early Years Hubs and Early Years Leaders programmes, as well as our 2019 London Early Years campaign.
We know the difference that quality early education can make, especially as we recover from the pandemic. It promotes a healthy start in life, improves social cohesion, narrows the inequality gap and allows parents to work.
In my second term, I have already launched Strong Early Years London, making good on my manifesto pledge to provide essential business support. This brings together sector-specific advice through a one-stop shop hosted on the London Business Hub, as well as offering a personal triage service and more intensive one-to-ones for early years providers that are most at risk of closure.
In April [2021], we launched our £2million Early Years Sector Skills project, with money from the European Social Fund. This will help unemployed Londoners gain industry-relevant qualifications and pre-apprenticeship skills in the early years sector, addressing the recruitment challenges that have been exacerbated by the pandemic.
We have been supporting the development of a quality early years workforce through adult education, too. In 2019/20, £3.4million was directed from the AEB to support child development and wellbeing courses. As part of the London recovery programme, we have committed funds through the robust safety net mission to encourage uptake of early years entitlements and help parents understand what benefits they are eligible for. I will also continue, Chair, with our Child Obesity Taskforce to drive forward the recommendations made in its Every Child a Healthy Weight report.

Emma Best: Thank you, MrMayor. Early years is clearly a priority, then. You have touched on some of the areas that are most pertinent to your mayoralty. Could you provide some specific KPIs and targets that you expect to achieve in those areas?

Sadiq Khan: I am more than happy for the relevant committee to look at what measures they would like us to have measured. I am quite clear in relation to this area of work. I am really proud that we are investing more in this area than the previous Mayor did in his last term, but it is not unreasonable to want to see what value that investment leads to. SusanHall [AM] chairs the Budget and Performance Committee, but I am more than happy to work with the Assembly to make sure we have the right KPIs in place.

Emma Best: Specifically, for example, have you set yourself a target for the percentage decrease you would like to see there in childhood obesity?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, we have. The Taskforce has set targets, which I can send to the Member.

Emma Best: Do you know what targets that you are aiming for?

Sadiq Khan: No, that answer is not in this question. If you ask an open question, it is difficult to get a specific answer. If you ask a specific question, I can give you a specific answer. I can write to you in relation to the target the Childhood Obesity Taskforce set in 2017. I do not have it in this lever-arch file.

Emma Best: MrMayor, with all due respect, the question was on early years programmes and you went into detail, for example, on obesity and so I would expect you to perhaps have that information. Much like when AssemblyMemberBailey asked you for some information on the employment figures‑‑

Sadiq Khan: Sure. I will send you clips from when [The Rt Hon] BorisJohnson [MP] was Mayor and we will compare and contrast who has detail and who does not.

Emma Best: You might want to try to be BorisJohnson, but perhaps that is your aim and not mine. I do not know. That is the comparison you are looking at‑‑

Sadiq Khan: No, God forbid. My wife would not allow it.

Emma Best: I would like to think that perhaps as a Labour Mayor you would not be comparing yourself and wanting to be much like the Conservative Mayor, but perhaps that is your aim.

Sadiq Khan: God forbid.

Emma Best: Apparently that is your aim.

Sadiq Khan: That is your dream, maybe, not mine. Maybe next election in three years’ time.

Andrew Boff: Have you finished, AssemblyMember?

Sadiq Khan: I think she has finished.
Emma Best AM: I am finished, yes.

Development in London

Emma Best: How will theMayorlook to improve large development and regeneration projects this term?

Sadiq Khan: My London Plan is now in place, and all its policies are underpinned by the principle of good growth: growth that is socially and economically inclusive and environmentally sustainable. This means creating quality places that work for all Londoners. It does not mean growth at any cost, which is too often what we have seen in the past, leaving us with a legacy of sites that provide hardly any affordable housing and create soulless spaces. We are doing things differently.
In my first term, we drove up the number of genuinely affordable home schemes of all sizes were providing. Last year, we secured an average of 40% affordable units on schemes that were referred to me. We also made sure that referrable schemes were subject to a design review early on so that quality design was baked in at the start rather than being a token gesture tacked on at the end. Via the London Review Panel, my Mayor’s Design Advocates reviewed over 140 schemes, leading to higher-quality housing, employment spaces and infrastructure.
This approach is part of my Good Growth by Design programme, which seeks to enhance the design of the built environment and make the sector itself more inclusive, to help create a city that works for all Londoners. I am committed to working with London boroughs and local stakeholders to bring about the right sort of change on both small and large-scale developments. This means change that benefits existing communities, welcomes new people, provides employment and genuinely affordable housing, protects cultural and heritage assets, secures community facilities and social infrastructure, and ensures development is properly integrated into the wider area.
Opportunity Area Planning Frameworks are a great example of this. We have put public engagement at the heart of their development, working with local groups on planning frameworks, for example, Thamesmead and Abbey Wood and the Royal Docks and Beckton Riverside. Having now adopted the London Plan, we can really press on with delivering good growth, both in the formulation of area-based policy, strategies and masterplans and in the implementation of the Plan at planning application stage. Where they undermine our efforts to do so, such as the extension of permitted development rights, we will continue to lobby for change in the Government’s planning reforms.

Emma Best: Thank you, MrMayor. I would like to dip down more into your answer there on respecting character of local areas and ask you if you do respect the suburban character of outer London and whether there is a place for suburban London within your mayoralty. I ask this because you have accepted, in your time as Mayor, 19 applications refused by local authorities and opposed by local residents in many suburban areas.
Would you then accept that it does appear that there is a certain war on the suburbs here and do you recognise there is a need to change your approach and listen more carefully to the concerns of local residents and local authorities?

Sadiq Khan: Often councils lobby me to take over a scheme because they understand the importance of that scheme and there have been concerns raised by local interests which make it difficult to do. We take over a scheme when there is a strategic interest to do so, where, for example, a decision by the council is in contravention of the London Plan or the Draft London Plan as it was then. Our interventions led to huge improvements in schemes to the benefit of our city.
We need to be making sure that placemaking is better in our city. That means the London Plan considers where people live, work, play and study. As a consequence of our intervention, we have led to not just improved numbers of genuinely affordable homes, but to improved workspaces. We have also managed to protect cultural and heritage assets by the work we have done with developers, and helped fund investment in community facilities and social infrastructure through the work we have done after I have taken over a scheme.
I am very keen to work with councils where we can, but if it is the case that we think a scheme should be taken over, we will take it over to improve it for the benefit of the community and our city.

Emma Best: Thanks, MrMayor. I am slightly confused by your answer, insofar as last week when you and I spoke in the Plenary meeting about family housing targets, you said that you would not set a target because you believed it was up to boroughs, which know their areas best. Now your answer seems to suggest that on these tall buildings, your teams knows best, and boroughs are not so sure what they are doing, and perhaps need your intervention.

Sadiq Khan: They are two different issues. In relation to genuinely affordable homes, we do have targets in relation to our expectation that, if you want to get in the fast-track system, we want 35% of the homes to be genuinely affordable and, if it is public land, 50% of the homes to be genuinely affordable. We have explained what we mean by genuinely affordable. That is City Hall saying to councils what the expectation is.
In relation to the density mix of family housing and in relation to what the needs are for an area, what we are not going to do is have a matrix for the 32 boroughs in London saying what the needs are in each area, nor will we have a one-size-fits-all approach for all the 32 boroughs. We want the 32 boroughs - the City of London works a bit differently - to do their own assessment of what the needs are in their areas for family housing.
The point I make about family housing is that if it is market value, it will not be affordable for the vast majority of Londoners, who earn about £30,000 on average and not the £300,000 or £400,000 you would need to be able to afford a family home at market value. That is not very encouraging for more submarket family housing, whether it is councils, whether it is housing associations or whether it is intermediate, so that those Londoners who need a family home can afford to live in one.

Emma Best: Thanks. I hate to interrupt but that was answering a slightly different question. We are talking about protecting the character of suburban areas. I would also suggest that by not building family housing, you are only making that problem worse with the markets exploding and just rising.
Just to finish up, really, on this, you know the Planning and Regeneration Committee advised that you create a Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) for tall buildings. Will you commit to doing that?

Sadiq Khan: In relation to an SPG for tall buildings?

Emma Best: Absolutely.

Sadiq Khan: I do not have the answer to that. Can I write to you on that one? I am not sure what we have said about tall buildings going forward because the London Plan was finalised only two or three months ago. What we are asking local councils to do is to have their own policies. There is a good place in there for tall buildings. I can write back, Chair, with your permission, to the Member, about that.

Emma Best: Thanks, MrMayor.

Transport for London Settlement (11)

Elly Baker: In October 2020 an internal TfL document was leaked, which claimed that “Introducing driverless trains across London Underground would cost £7bn and represent "poor value for money"”. Was that document provided to the DfT and what was their response?

The Mayor: The October 2020 Transport for London (TfL) document referred to was an internal analysis of the cost-benefit of automating different parts of the London Underground network. This analysis was prepared as part of the Government-mandated review of TfL’s finances by KPMG. It was shared with the Department for Transport (DfT) as part of the review by KPMG.
No formal response has been received to date but, in the latest TfL funding settlement of 1 June 2021, the Government set out a condition requiring TfL to work with DfT to examine the feasibility of producing a viable business case for implementing driverless trains on the Waterloo & City and Piccadilly lines on the London Underground. A similar condition was also set out in the previous TfL funding settlement of 31 October 2020, which covered the second half of the 2020/21 financial year.

Transport for London Settlement (10)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says “DfT will lead a joint programme with TfL on the implementation of Driverless Trains on the London Underground”, but in July 2020 you said, “There are no Tube lines that would be able to operate without drivers without any signalling upgrades, new infrastructure or new trains. The London Underground system is an extremely complex environment, particularly the deep Tube lines. For reasons of safety, they are not suitable for driverless trains and there are no plans for their introduction, as I have previously set out.” Have the discussions with Government allayed your safety fears?

The Mayor: The Government, as part of the latest funding agreement, has asked Transport for London (TfL) to re-visit its assessment of driverless trains and will fund the cost of looking at business cases for driverless trains on two of TfL’s lines.
While TfL can fulfil this request, it will never compromise on safety. The Government has asked TfL, working jointly with the Department for Transport, to develop business cases for driverless operation with a member of staff on board at all times like the Docklands Light Rail (DLR). New trains, new signalling and other infrastructure such as platform edge doors would be needed and the potential for operational cost savings is therefore unlikely to be material. There remains no current plans to introduce driverless trains.

Counter terror preparedness

Unmesh Desai: You have stated that you are to commission an update of the Harris review into London’s counter terror preparedness. Have all the recommendations of the original review been implemented by the relevant agencies, and have there been any failures that have led you to seek to commission this update?

Sadiq Khan: Nothing is more important to me than keeping Londoners safe. Londoners have a right to expect us to be prepared for any potential attack on our city. That is why on taking office I asked LordHarris [of Haringey] to undertake a review into London’s preparedness. Now, five years on, given the evolving threat of terrorism, I am commissioning an update to make sure London remains as prepared as it can be.
The Harris Review made more than 100 recommendations, the vast majority of which have been implemented, resulting in numerous improvements to safety for our city. There is now better communication with Londoners during and after an attack. For example, the deployment of the military following an attack has been accompanied by significant communications activity by the military, the police and others to reassure Londoners about their presence. Advice to owners of crowded places and businesses has been improved and updated, including the Cross-sector Safety & Security Communications hub London Protect newsletter. The rollout of Project Servitor, in which specially trained armed officers undertake engagement and prevention work has been crucial in gathering the intelligence to assist counterterrorism units across the UK and disrupting a range of criminal activity.
A refresh of the Harris Review is important at a time when we are due to receive the findings of both the Manchester Arena Inquiry and the Fishmongers Hall Inquests. The review will consider to what extent the MPS, the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and other London organisations have acted on the relevant recommendations and what gaps remain. Work on starting the review is underway. As London recovers from the pandemic, our work is more important than ever.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you, MrMayor. You mentioned the Fishmongers Hall attack and the inquiry. The inquest identified the Multi-Agency Public Partnership Arrangements (MAPPA) as having failed in effectively monitoring the offender following his release from prison. The original Harris Review - and I did speak to [Lord] TobyHarris and give him my views back in 2016 - failed to mention MAPPA as an issue. Considering the work of organisations around the country clearly impact on London’s preparedness for a terror attack, will you be advising that the scope of the updated review takes into account the work of the agencies involved in MAPPA meetings, such as the Probation Service?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, good question. LordHarris will be looking at what the terms of the review are. Just to reassure you, the Government commissioned JonathanHall, a very experienced Queen’s Counsel (QC), to review the work and the effectiveness of MAPPA. We will be looking at what Hall says and I am sure LordHarris will.

Unmesh Desai: Thank you. NeilBasu [QPM, Assistant Commissioner, MPS] has also said that the pandemic has created a “perfect storm” that has left individuals more vulnerable to radicalisation and online grooming, and there have been concerns around a drop in Prevent referrals due to the closure of schools. How has your Countering Violent Extremism programme been working to address this? Given the heightened sense of risk, will you be investing more in this area over the coming term?

Sadiq Khan: We are worried, our counterterror information is also that the pandemic has led to more people using the internet and more vulnerable people being radicalised through the internet. It is really important we understand that. As lockdown restrictions are lifted, the concern is that their radicalisation could lead to violent acts. We are doing a number of things to address that in relation to the work we are doing around countering violent extremism. We had a fund, as you know, the Shared Endeavour Fund, working with community groups on 30 projects with more than 25,000 participants. You praised the app we started, the #iREPORTit app. We have had a large number of referrals from the app as well. We are going to continue to occupy this space.
Just a final point. We have launched a second round of funding for the Countering Violent Extremism programme because we are keen to make sure we do work around resilience as well as enforcement.

Unmesh Desai: Finally, MrMayor, last week marked the fifth anniversary of JoCox’s murder at the hands of a far-right terrorist. The charity Hope Not Hate - I know you are familiar with its work - in its State of Hate 2021 report, which was published earlier this year, specifically talks about Nazi terrorism remaining a threat and increasingly involving teenagers. Twelve people were convicted last year, of whom six were teenagers, and 11 are currently awaiting trial. I understand there have been significant arrests as well relating to far-right terrorism made in the past few months across the country. How will your work from City Hall seek to address this issue in particular?

Sadiq Khan: The work we are doing around countering violent extremism also includes the extreme far right. The caseload of the counterterror team in this area is increasing and [Assistant Commissioner] NeilBasu is on record expressing his concern about this. There are also similarities in relation to vulnerable people, radicalisation, charismatic orators and so on. The work we are doing will help, but it is really important that we do not allow a situation that fosters division, which can be a breeding ground for radicalisation.

Transport for London Settlement (7)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says TfL will look at providing, “quantification of anticipated carbon reductions from future capital spend”. Are you able to outline the current process TfL follows to reduce the carbon impact on their capital spending?

The Mayor: Transport for London’s (TfL) capital programme is developed with a view to maximising the aims and outcomes of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) in the context of TfL’s legal obligations and available funding. Decarbonisation runs as a key objective throughout the MTS.
In developing its business plan, TfL assesses the impacts against the MTS and other strategic outcomes and whether sufficient progress is being made. TfL regularly reports progress on decarbonisation to the TfL Board. In addition, TfL reports on its own operational carbon emissions on a quarterly basis to the Safety, Sustainability and Human Resources Panel.
TfL has a clear strategy for decarbonisation and is focusing limited resources on schemes that have the biggest impact. Promoting sustainable travel (walking, cycling and public transport) and reducing private car use have the potential for the biggest impact as well as additional health benefits for Londoners. In terms of TfL’s own carbon emissions, around 95 per cent is from electricity use and bus emissions. TfL has a strategy to transition its electricity requirements for rail traction to 100 per cent renewables by 2030 and, subject to funding, is aiming to have a fully zero emission bus fleet by the end of the decade as well. Capital spending that supports these initiatives are given a high priority in TfL’s planning process and is central to its Financial Sustainability Plan provided to Government.

Transport for London Settlement (6)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says, “Preparation of a revised medium-term capital investment programme as appropriate to TfL’s financially constrained position and future demand scenarios post-Covid 19”. What feedback, if any, have you had from TfL’s 30 September 2020 Spending Review Prospectus?

The Mayor: Transport for London’s (TfL’s) Spending Review Prospectus set out its long-term vision for what it could deliver with long-term, secure, committed funding. The prospectus outlined investment which would maintain TfL’s ageing assets, support the recovery from COVID, and accelerate the green recovery.
As of May 2021, Government has committed to continue to support TfL in implementing the programmes of work that are affordable within the latest funding settlement.
I have been clear that without a long-term funding deal, TfL is unable to commit to contracts for projects that will improve our transport network and aid the national recovery from the pandemic. TfL have many projects that are shovel-ready and also support jobs outside London, but need a long-term funding deal to be progressed.I will continue to make the case to Government for such a deal in the strongest possible terms, including in the run-up to the Comprehensive Spending Review later this year.

Transport for London Settlement (5)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says you will set up a “joint review of demand to inform future service level requirements and potential changes from 2022/23 onwards”. TfL have already done a lot of work on passenger demand in the post-pandemic period. Can you update me on the latest thinking from TfL on future passenger demand and the required service levels?

The Mayor: As the pandemic is still ongoing there is clearly huge uncertainty over how much longer it will continue and what the post-pandemic period might look like, meaning that forecasting future travel trends is incredibly difficult. To deal with this uncertainty Transport for London (TfL) has been undertaking scenario planning to help inform decision making by considering a wide range of potential outcomes. These scenarios look at a variety of potential future trends relating to the speed at which factors such as London’s economy, population and levels of commuting might return to pre-pandemic levels once the threat of the virus subsides. In the coming weeks and months TfL should have a better understanding of how the pandemic and subsequent recovery are likely to play out, meaning that it can focus its planning activities on the scenarios that seem most plausible.
TfL will present its latest central forecast for 2021/22 and a high level view of 22/23 in its Revised Budget, which will be presented to the TfL Board on 28 July.
TfL continues to run a near-normal service to ensure customers can rely on there being a frequent service which provides adequate social distancing. TfL’s Financial Sustainability Plan makes a strong case for keeping services at this level to support the wider economic recovery of London and it continues to make this case to Government.

Micro-Consolidation Facilities

Elly Baker: The GLA encourages new developments to provide micro-consolidation facilities wherever possible, as part of the Delivery and Servicing Plans that are required through the planning application process. Can you provide details on how many such facilities have been provided since May 2016 and how they are being used to support greener last-mile alternatives?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) and I are committed to promoting the development of micro-consolidation facilities and have taken action to do so. I previously outlined current work by TfL on this topic in my response to Mayor’s Question 2021/0993.
TfL encourages new developments to provide micro-consolidation facilities wherever possible as part of the Delivery and Servicing Plans that are required through the planning application process. The benefits of micro-consolidation are set out in TfL’s Delivery and Servicing Plan Guidance which can be found here: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/delivery-and-servicing-plan-guidance.pdf.
However, neither TfL nor the Greater London Authority hold records on the number of micro-consolidation centres that are ultimately provided in developments.

Companion Travel Pass

Elly Baker: Please provide an update on work to introduce a companion travel pass in London.

The Mayor: I am committed to making London’s transport network more inclusive and equitable, and this includes delivering more affordable transport for Londoners. Between 2016 and 2020 I froze all Transport for London (TfL) fares and introduced the Hopper bus fare, which has seen more than half a billion journeys benefit from cheaper bus travel.
Delivering affordable fares remains a priority for me and this is why I am committed to keep fares — in particular bus fares — as low as possible. I have protected the Freedom Pass, maintained young people’s travel concessions, and will be introducing half-price travel for care leavers who often need extra support with travel costs.
Exploring a companion pass was a pledge set out before the pandemic. Initial estimates at the time suggested that it would cost£10-20mper year. Due to the unforeseen impact of the pandemic on TfL’s finances and the fact that TfL has not been compensated in full by the Government for the cost of the pandemic, TfL is not currently in a position to make this financial commitment; and as such, it was not included in my May 2021 manifesto, upon which I was elected. As much as I would like to be able to introduce a companion pass, the current financial climate, and the Government’s specific restrictions around concessions in London, mean that TfL have had to suspend work on it.

Waking Watches

Anne Clarke: What representations have you made to Government for them to pay upfront the costs of remediation for those living with flammable cladding, and in the meantime, what could they do to support those leaseholders paying extortionate Waking Watches costs?

Sadiq Khan: The recent fourth anniversary of the Grenfell tragedy was an unfortunate reminder that too many people in London and across the country are still living in unsafe buildings. I have always been clear that upfront Government funding should cover the cost of remediating buildings of all heights and with all types of safety defect, not just cladding, as well as interim fire safety measures. In December2020, I also called for the Government to introduce a levy on major private developers that would raise at least £3billion to fund this work.
While the additional funding for cladding remediation announced by Ministers in February[2021] was welcome, I am disappointed that the Government refused on no less than five occasions to accept amendments to the Fire Safety Bill that would have protected all leaseholders from life‑altering bills. Although I welcome the Waking Watch Relief Fund, it has significant limitations. It fails to reimburse leaseholders who have already paid out for waking watch costs, it does not consider those who continue to need a waking watch as well as a fire alarm, and it fails to address buildings under 80metres. I will continue to call on the Government to take action to protect leaseholders caught up in this building safety crisis and I stand ready to work collaboratively to achieve the systemic change needed.

Anne Clarke: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Waking watches, as you know, are a relatively new phenomenon. The Secretary of State for Housing, RobertJenrick [MP], previously told local authority trading standards departments to, quote, “use their powers to investigate” waking watches, even though they have no powers to do so. Do you agree with the Local Government Association (LGA) that local authority trading standards departments do not have the powers to regulate and oversee the costs of waking watches?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, the LGA is right. There is a number of misunderstandings relating to waking watches and, although they are quite recent, you are right, unfortunately they are quite common. It is the building owner who is responsible for the waking watch, rather than fire and rescue services. There are some regulations in relation to some of this. It is putting additional pressure, as you said, on local authorities, but also on the LFB, and some clarity and support in terms of resources from the Government would be well‑received by both councils and the LFB as well.

Anne Clarke: Thank you. I share your concern about the pressure this is putting on the LFB. What actions should Ministers take to support the LFB and local councils to address poor regulation and to show that they understand the outrageous costs faced by those in buildings with waking watches?

Sadiq Khan: A number of things that need to happen as soon as possible. First, to implement the recommendations from Phase1 of the Grenfell Inquiry. Second, to reimburse those leaseholders who have paid for a waking watch and are still paying for it even though there are fire alarms in place. Thirdly and most importantly, to remove the things that are causing their building to be potentially dangerous as soon as possible, whether it is cladding or another form of remediation work required, and then, later on, there can be an argument or discussion about how the Government is reimbursed from the building owner, the managers and so forth. The more they delay in remediating buildings, the more this cloud will be hanging over the heads of leaseholders and others and the more there will be this uncertainty. Just imagine the costs we could save in not needing to have the inspections from local authorities and from the fire service if this stuff was sorted out.

Anne Clarke: Yes, absolutely. Finally, how has monitoring building safety when simultaneous evacuation advice has been put in place impacted upon the work of the LFB and has the Government recognised this change in workload through funding for additional resources to support this necessary and important work to keep London’s built environment safe?

Sadiq Khan: It is just worth reminding those watching ‑ you know this very well ‑ that for a long time the fire service’s strategy of dealing with fires was built upon a premise that the built environment was safe, the so‑called ‘stay put’ advice. That has been completely destroyed by the evidence from the awful fire at Grenfell four years ago. Firefighters going to a fire cannot have the confidence that the units are secure and ‘stay put’ can work. That has led to a huge number of challenges for the fire service. We are investing what we can with limited resources but we need support from the Government.
The good news is the Government has given some financial support and we should thank them for the support they are giving us in relation to the Building Risk Review Programme and in relation to the protection programme. We welcome the support they have given us. We are trying to work with the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to make sure they understand what our needs are going to be going forward, to make sure we can get a decent settlement from the Government in relation to the CSR. The worry is that we will use our reserves in relation to this year and next year and MHCLG will give us what they can afford to give us, but they will not have the resource to give us further funding going forward. For the foreseeable future, we are going to need more funding from the Government to the LFB to make sure we can address the concerns that have been demonstrated in the built environment by Grenfell.

Anne Clarke: OK. Thank you very much.

Andrew Boff: That being the last question, I would like to thank you, Mr Mayor. You are now free from your obligations so you may leave. Thank you very much.

Sadiq Khan: Thank you, Chair.

ULEZ

Peter Fortune: What plans do you have to reopen TfL’s suspended ULEZ scrappage schemes?

Sadiq Khan: At the time of announcing our plans for the Ultra-Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), I asked the Government for support towards a vehicle scrappage scheme. This was not provided, though I introduced a series of TfL scrappage schemes to support Londoners to make the switch to greener vehicles. I initially allocated £48 million from the TfL budget to three schemes to support low-income and disabled Londoners, small businesses and charities, and heavy vehicles. Due to unprecedented demand for the scrappage scheme for vans, the funding was all allocated and so the scheme was suspended on 20August 2020. We have paid out over £33million from this scheme and over 5,000 vans have been scrapped.
Similarly, the funds were all allocated in the heavy vehicle scheme and it was suspended at the end of September 2020. We have paid out around £1.5 million through this scheme and over 100 heavy vehicles have been scrapped or retrofitted. The car and motorcycle scheme for low-income and disabled Londoners is the scheme for which the highest number of Londoners are eligible and this remains open. As of this month, we have paid out over £9million to Londoners through this scheme with more than 4,500 vehicles already scrapped. In total, we have made payments of over £44million across the three schemes, helping to scrap or retrofit nearly 10,000 older, more polluting vehicles. Charities can still continue to access funding to scrap minibuses given their vital role in our communities and the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.
The scrappage schemes have played a vital role in providing financial support to vulnerable Londoners. That is why I have added a further £8.5million in additional funding for scrappage this year, topping up the total funds to over £56million. We have still had no support from the Government. Part of the remaining TfL funding will be allocated to previous applicants of the van scrappage scheme whose applications TfL was unable to process due to oversubscription to the hugely popular scheme. It is clear the Government will not be able to achieve its own net zero target by 2050 if it does not invest to deliver net zero in London. The Government has provided funding for scrappage in Birmingham and Bath to support their clean air zones, but not for London to support the ULEZ.

Peter Fortune: Thank you very much, MrMayor. What we are talking about here is your expansion of the ULEZ scheme right across London. It is your expansion, so we would like to talk about that rather than the Government. Our concern is that this is going to hit the poorest in our communities the hardest. I just want to dig into some of these numbers. What is TfL’s latest estimate for how many non-compliant vehicles are driving into the expanded area?

Sadiq Khan: By the way, the schemes in Bath and Birmingham are also the Bath scheme and the Birmingham scheme, which the Government has given support to. So to coin a phrase, did you say you cannot speak for the Government?

Peter Fortune: I said I am not at Birmingham Question Time; it is London Question Time.

Sadiq Khan: So I would hope you will lobby the Government on behalf of Londoners, which you can do.

Peter Fortune: We can swap jobs if you like, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: You have to stand for election and we know how it turned out for the last candidate from your party who stood for election on 6May.
In relation to the Central London scheme, for which we have figures that are accurate, the number of compliant vehicles is now 87%. In relation to the wider scheme, the expanded scheme, six out of ten Londoners in the expanded area do not own a car. In some boroughs like Hackney it is even more than six out of ten. The figures we have in relation to vehicles that are non-compliant for the expanded scheme - I can write to you with exact details - the number may be a bit dated because over the last period there have been more people converting to compliant vehicles, but I am happy to write to you. We do have the figure in TfL and I will drop you a note.

Peter Fortune: That will be fantastic, thank you, MrMayor. An approximate number would be great. Building on that, how much is left in the car and motorcycle scrappage scheme? The concern is that there is enough in that scheme so that is not suspended as well. How much is left?

Sadiq Khan: Good question. In relation to both the car and motorcycle scheme, and also the charities scheme, we think we will be using up the monies pretty soon. If you remember, I mentioned that the van scrappage scheme, we allocated more money, we have reopened that for those who had applied previously but we had run out of money. So at the moment our estimates are we do not think we will run out of money, if you see what I mean.

Peter Fortune: I understand. That is the root of a lot of what I am asking today, because our concern is that this is going to hit the poorest in our communities. Earlier in the year, the GLA Conservatives proposed that we use £50million from City Hall’s business rates reserves to invest in TfL scrappage schemes. That money could help remove over 7,000 non-compliant vehicles. Is that something that you can look at again to help those underprivileged Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I would love to. The challenge is, pursuant to the most recent deal done with the Government, TfL is required to find an additional £300 million savings in the year 2021/22 and £730million savings by 2022/23. Any additional monies we put into TfL would be directed towards the savings requirement from the Government and/or new income revenues required later on. Therefore the challenge is, we put more money into TfL, we will not be able to direct it towards the people that you care about because of the requirements from the Government. But if you are able to lobby the Government to remove some of those strings, I am sure we can do more.

Peter Fortune: So just so I am clear, what you are saying is you cannot use that reserve to fund any kind of TfL vehicle?

Sadiq Khan: What I am saying is that, because of the deal with the Government, any monies that go into TfL will be directed towards the savings and/or the revenues in the future rather than those Londoners, unless we can find savings elsewhere.

Peter Fortune: Turning to an interview you gave yesterday where you spoke to the Evening Standard, you said that Londoners do not need to buy a brand-new vehicle, they can buy a second-hand vehicle, which is a little bit confusing. That is suggesting that we take money out of the hands of the poor and send it to used car salesmen. You went on to say that the good news is that, for a vehicle to be ULEZ-compliant, it is not that expensive. You do not need to buy a new car; all you need to do is have a petrol car that is newer than 2005 or a diesel car more recent than 2015. MrMayor, would you not agree that good news would be providing some extra support for Londoners?

Sadiq Khan: I think that is a point you should make to the Chancellor [of the Exchequer] and to the Secretary of State for Transport, who appear to be wanting to punish Londoners who are crucial to our country’s recovery. These are points I have made regularly to the Government. You are right, we should not be punishing the poorest Londoners. That is one of the reasons why we are keen to fix the issue of poor quality air here in London. It is an issue of social justice. It is the poorest Londoners, least likely to own cars, who suffer the worst consequences of poor-quality air. It is the poorest children who have the stunted lungs and the poorest adults who have asthma.

Peter Fortune: Absolutely, we understand that. It is not that we are talking about. We are talking about the charge for the poorest people in London. It seems that they have two options: their option is to pay the daily charge or to pay a sort of Arthur Daley [fictional character of television series] charge, where they go and buy a new car. We do not think this is a great thing for Londoners to do, to suggest that they go down to some sort of second-hand car showroom. Would you please look again at our proposals to help those Londoners because they really do need that support?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am always happy to look at good suggestions and I am more than happy to look at any recommendations you have to try to address the issue of poor quality air in London at the same time as helping the poorest Londoners.

Peter Fortune: Thank you, Chair.

End of the Eviction Ban

Sem Moema: With the Government ending the ban on evictions, how do we stop Londoners being forced out of their homes?You have said, “my team continues to talk to government officials about how best to respond to this situation [the end of the eviction ban]. This should include a financial support package for those who have built up arrears during the pandemic, improved access to welfare benefits and a two-year rent freeze in London. The Government must also now act on its promise to ban Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions, to provide far greater security for renters.” Can you provide an update on the talks with the Government and whether they will be taking the steps you have suggested?

Sadiq Khan: The COVID‑19 pandemic has both highlighted and exacerbated the precarious situation faced by London’s 2.4million private renters. The Government’s own data reveals that over a fifth of private renters have seen their income fall by at least £100per month nationally. It also shows that 17%, equivalent to more than 400,000 renters in London, have fallen behind on their rent or are expecting to do so soon. I welcome the emergency measures put in place by the Government to protect renters, including the pause on the enforcement of evictions by court bailiffs. Now that the pause on evictions is being lifted and other protections are being wound down, the Government needs to bring in measures to prevent an increase in evictions, something that renters and landlords alike agree should urgently happen.
First, I am calling for the Government to make grants available to renters where they cannot afford to pay their rent or have accumulated arrears due to the ongoing impact of the pandemic. This should be part of a wider financial package that includes improved access to welfare benefits and more funding for councils and other organisations to prevent and mitigate homelessness.
Second, the Government should grant me powers to implement a two‑year rent freeze in London as a first step towards delivering rent controls that would make renting more affordable. Post‑pandemic rent increases would further compound the hardships many Londoners are experiencing. Finally, the Government must act swiftly on its long‑promised commitment to ban Section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions, alongside measures that would bring more security for renters.

Sem Moema: Thank you, Mayor Khan. A survey by the JosephRowntree Foundation has shown that 215,000 renting London households are worried about being evicted in the next three months, and another almost half million, 400,000, are worried about paying their rent. I just want to contrast this with the very welcome support that has been offered to tenants who are commercial tenants and are being supported by the Government’s remediation to recover from the pandemic. No such support is being offered to private tenants, and as people on all sides of this Chamber can understand, the termination of a Section 21 is the number one cause of homelessness across our capital in all constituencies. I am just wondering what your views are on whether or not the Government is aware of the magnitude of the situation facing London specifically, and what further steps they can take, in addition to what you have outlined, to support Londoners in not seeing a massive boost in homelessness in the next few months.

Sadiq Khan: The moratorium on business tenants being evicted that was going to end this month has been extended by a year and, like you, I welcomed that. We lobbied for that and the Government deserves credit for that U‑turn. I think they should be levelling up in relation to allowing private tenants to also benefit from that moratorium by a year, for the reasons you mentioned. If they do not, we can guarantee there will be more and more tenants being evicted, either leaving their premises in advance of the court hearing where the eviction notice takes place, or some landlords unlawfully asking their tenants to leave in advance of the date. I think what the Government should do is give some respite to those tenants and landlords who are in that situation, and also support help in relation to the arrears that have built up.
By the way ‑ you will know this from your work in Hackney ‑ more and more tenants are now families with children, and the consequences of being evicted if you are a family are far more serious, particularly if the children are going to school, than they otherwise would be for adults. That is why it is so important for the Government to look into more assistance for private tenants.

Sem Moema: Thank you. I would really appreciate your views on whether or not you agree with me that this is the calm before the storm and we are going to see, sadly, a massive increase in the number of people who are worried about paying their rents, but also mortgages too. In relation to some of the points raised earlier about family homes, the Local Housing Allowance, an increase in the £20 Universal Credit uplift, would be a welcome permanent addition to those families who are struggling to afford the family‑sized housing that is available in the capital. I am just wondering if you could also agree with me ‑ we have had lots of calls for targets ‑ whether it is a welcome thing to make sure that the Government continues to target a date for the ending of Section 21 so that those families can remain in their homes.

Sadiq Khan: It seems targets are only a topic of discussion when it is a Labour politician being asked to make a target rather than a Conservative one.
I am concerned that if you think it is bad now ‑ you are spot on ‑ this is the calm before the storm. Well, it is not really a calm; it is a storm before a bigger storm. The real crisis point will be a combination of the temporary uplift in Universal Credit ending and the furlough scheme ending with no date for ‘no fault’ evictions to be taken away. I worry this September [2021] we could see a significant number of families who are renting privately evicted unless the Government steps in. The Government has agreed to bring in [a ban on] ‘no fault’ evictions. A lot of people have lobbied for that, including myself, housing charities, councils and others. They have agreed to it and we are unclear why they are delaying. What I would say to the Government is, particularly in the absence of a moratorium on evictions in the private rented sector, they should bring in, as soon as possible, the end of ‘no fault’ evictions and Section 21.

Sem Moema: Thank you. My final point is, again, on the point that you have talked about, that during the pandemic there have been unlawful evictions of occupiers and that has doubled between 2019 and 2020. Just whether or not you are surprised by that figure and that increase in unlawful evictions.

Sadiq Khan: I would just say ‑ and I know you are not doing this ‑ we must not make sweeping generalisations against landlords. Most landlords are pretty good, but a small number are evicting tenants unlawfully. What makes that easier to happen is the lack of availability of affordable legal advice and the absence of Legal Aid. That is why it is really important that tenants receive good advice. There is still some free advice available from the Citizens Advice Bureau and with law centres. My message to tenants is: please make sure you try to get legal advice. Sometimes you may feel you have no choice but to leave in advance of a court hearing, and it is best not to do so because once you are out of your home you are homeless and it is very difficult to support you, particularly if you have children.

Sem Moema: Thank you very much. I wanted to add that I completely agree with the fact that the vast majority of landlords are very positive and support their tenants. We want to make sure that the system works for everybody but clearly we have a broken system that is putting landlords and tenants in a really invidious position here in London.

Sadiq Khan: I agree with that, yes.

Delays to Court Cases

Joanne McCartney: There is a large backlog of court cases in London. What effect is this delay to justice having on criminal cases in London?

Sadiq Khan: Prior to the pandemic, there was already a significant backlog of cases within the criminal courts and victims were waiting too long for justice to be delivered. These delays have been exacerbated by the pandemic, which reduced the capacity of the Courts, increasing backlogs across the criminal justice system (CJS). Whilst this issue is a national one, the impact is felt disproportionately in London with over 14,000 cases outstanding in the Crown Court. The anxiety and trauma victims experience is being prolonged as they wait for justice, placing an increased demand on frontline support services as a result. London’s Victims’ Commissioner, ClaireWaxman, has heard first-hand from victims and witnesses who have lost faith and withdrawn from the system, or whose trials are listed into 2023. Of course, there has also been an impact on statutory services, with criminal justice agencies having to manage vastly increased workloads and adapt in response to new responsibilities.
I raised this issue with the Justice Secretary last year, and my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and the Victims’ Commissioner have been lobbying for additional resources as well as bringing together statutory partners at a local level to tackle these issues. They welcome the steps that the Government has taken to mitigate against the growing backlog, such as opening Nightingale‑style courts, including five additional criminal courts in London, and removing the cap on judicial sitting days, but I am disappointed that our calls for a large‑scale secure facility in London to deal with more complex custodial cases has not been addressed.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you, Mr Mayor. I am most concerned about vulnerable victims such as survivors of rape and domestic abuse. When I questioned the Deputy Commissioner [of the MPS] earlier this year, he said that due to the case backlog, the MPS witness and victim care unit had seen a 90% increase in workload. I know extra resources have been put in, but my concern is for, first of all, the safety of those people - primarily women - where their abusers may often be out on bail, but secondly about the attrition. Can I ask you about those two things? What does this mean for the safety, particularly of women and girls, and do you have any data on the attrition rate that is being caused by the delays?

Sadiq Khan: Yes. This is something that ClaireWaxman has done as the Victims’ Commissioner. We are concerned about both those things, and the concern is that things are getting worse, not better. You will have seen the apology from the Home Secretary and the Justice Secretary in relation to the appalling way victims of rape have been treated and the paucity of successful prosecutions, and I am afraid it is made worse by the pandemic. I am more than happy to write to you with the stats which demonstrate how this has been exacerbated by the pandemic, but we are taking steps to address the backlog and the MPS has secured some additional staff to go into the Witness Care Unit to address this issue.

Joanne McCartney: Good, thank you. In your answer you mentioned the much‑delayed Rape Review that the Government released last week, but that surprisingly did not make any reference either to the decades of cuts to our CJS or to the backlog of cases in this area. Will you be writing and making further representations to Government about the need for immediate action and funding?

Sadiq Khan: You are right, it did not mention that, but when asked questions by the media I think the Justice Secretary did accept the cuts had an impact on what we are seeing now. I see it, as Mayor of London, in relation to the lack of support for victims and survivors. I see it in relation to fewer police officers, which leads to less of an ability to investigate, and fewer specialist teams in the police service. I see it in relation to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) having lost between 25% and 30% of their budget, which has an impact on their caseload, and then we see it in the courts as well.
We are lobbying the Government to address the backlog. We do meet regularly with criminal justice partners. We are hoping this CSR sees a significant increase in investment in policing and justice. Without additional responses, we simply are not going to address some of the serious failings in the CJS, which leads to not having as many people arrested, charged, prosecuted and convicted for rape as there should be.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you. I think it is the case that you cannot get justice on the cheap, and if you believe in a system of justice that is fair and accessible you have to fund it properly.
My final question is around the Nightingale courts. They have been useful in clearing the backlog, but they are not really set up to deal with those complex cases. You have called for an increased court to deal with that. My concern, though, is that a lot of those venues that are used as these temporary courts will be going back to their normal use shortly. What assurances have you had from Government about replacing that capacity if those venues are no longer available?

Sadiq Khan: We have explained to the court the reasons why it is important for this to carry on for some time. I mentioned in answer to an earlier question that some of these trials are set for 2023, so it is hardly surprising that the attrition rates are so bad. We continue to work with the Government to find the right venues. You are right, some of these venues are not appropriate for the more complex multi-handers, but we are keen to work with the Government to find venues that can address some of these issues. Longer judicial sittings make a difference, sitting at weekends makes a difference and the Government is looking into the issue of jury sizes. All this addresses the issue of the backlog but, as you said, without additional investment of resources we will not be able to address this issue.

Joanne McCartney: Thank you.

Safe accommodation for survivors of domestic abuse

Sem Moema: During the Covid pandemic, you provided additional funding for safe accommodation for survivors of domestic abuse. What assessment have you made of the impact of that funding and what work will you undertake to ensure safety nets remain in place for survivors as we emerge from Covid restrictions?

The Mayor: The £1.5m I invested to establish a crisis response for those needing to flee domestic abuse in London during the Covid-19 pandemic has supported 277 adults and 122 children to date. This provision will remain in place until early 2022 to ensure support remains in place as we emerge from Covid restrictions. The programme has been evaluated and the final report will be published in summer 2021.
The learning from this programme will inform the GLA’s strategy for the delivery of the new duty under the Domestic Abuse Act to provide support for victims of domestic abuse and their children in refuges and other safe accommodation. I look forward to working with boroughs and partners to implement this duty to ensure there are accessible pathways to safety for those fleeing abuse.

Stop and search based on the smell of cannabis

Caroline Russell: The IOPC recommended against stop and searches based on the smell of cannabis alone, can you confirm that since the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) accepted this recommendationthat no Londoners have been stopped and searched solely for this reason?

Sadiq Khan: Stop and search is a vital policing tool, particularly in the fight against violence. The MPS has my support in using these powers to keep us safe, provided they are used in a professional, courteous way with appropriate grounds for doing so. However, throughout the engagement with communities from my Action Plan, stop and search was consistently raised as a key issue. Communities raised concerns about racial profiling and young Black men being stopped and searched by MPS police officers solely on the grounds of the smell of cannabis.
I have welcomed the MPS’s acceptance of all of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) recommendations on stop and search, including reaffirming their policy that officers should not rely on the smell of cannabis alone when deciding to stop and search someone, instead using grounds on multiple objective factors. This position is in accordance with the national Authorised Professional Practice. It is vital that oversight is strengthened to give Londoners confidence that the professional practice is followed.
Through my Action Plan I am determined to ensure London’s Black communities can have trust and confidence in the police. Work is now underway on the overhaul of the MOPAC community monitoring structures to ensure London’s diverse communities are better represented and can have a role in monitoring a wide range of police powers, including stop and search and the use of Tasers as well as the complaints process. The MPS continues to improve stop and search practice through enhanced training, which has included greater community involvement, lived experience sessions and unconscious bias training. The MPS has also strengthened its own supervision of stops with body-worn video footage of stops reviewed by line managers and any learning reflected back to officers.
I also recognise the wider issues around the effectiveness of cannabis enforcement in relation to tackling violence in London. That is why MOPAC has commissioned independent academic research on this subject.

Caroline Russell: Mr Mayor, I did not hear you answer my specific question, which is: are you able to tell me if, since the recommendations from the IOPC to the MPS in October 2020, there have been any further stops and searches conducted on the smell of cannabis alone?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, there should not have been any, but we are not able to give a number to confirm it is zero because of the vast numbers involved.

Caroline Russell: OK. I can let you know, having spoken to the youth‑led social action project, Hackney ACCOUNT, that they confirmed just last week on 15June [2021] that young people are still being stopped on just the basis of the smell of cannabis alone. What is worrying about this is that we are accepting the IOPC recommendations, but they do not seem to be filtering down to all the officers on the street.

Sadiq Khan: You are asserting something said by a community group, as important as they are, as a fact. I think we should be a bit careful about that assertion.

Caroline Russell: OK, but it still risks undermining your Action Plan. I am sure you are aware more than half the people stopped and searched in the last year were teenagers and young people, and it has a big impact on their lives and, importantly, how they view the police. Just going back to Hackney ACCOUNT, they have worked directly with young people and have released a really powerful report with recommendations for their local council, the local Basic Command Unit (BCU) and the MPS as the whole. I have it here for you. They have some really worthwhile recommendations including, for instance, conducting an independent evaluation of the Territorial Support Group (TSG), who specialise in public order policing. I believe you have been sent their report. Do you know when you are going to be able to respond to their report, with its very clear recommendations for the MPS?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I receive many reports and I am afraid I cannot give a date when I will be able to respond to this particular report. What I can say is that the Action Plan that we prepared last year after consulting communities across London, which involved not just myself and my Deputy Mayors but the MPS, made a number of recommendations. The Action Plan does have timelines in relation to when those actions are going to be acted upon and some of those timelines address some of the genuine concerns raised by Londoners through the AssemblyMember, which are in the report.

Caroline Russell: Yes. Mr Mayor, this is the kind of engagement that you are asking for in your Action Plan. It is directly with young people. I am very happy to send a copy of the report to you.
In your policing Action Plan, one of the actions that you said you would take is getting MOPAC to commission independent academic research to assess the effectiveness of cannabis enforcement in relation to tackling violence in London. It was supposed to begin before the end of 2020 and I just wonder how that research is going and when we can expect its conclusions.

Sadiq Khan: It is the research I mentioned in my answer and the Action Plan, which I am sure you have a copy of, sets out when it will be done by. It will be done by then.

Caroline Russell: Thank you very much, I look forward to seeing the conclusions when they appear but I am out of time now.

New community plans for London small sites

Siân Berry: How are you going to involve Londoners from the ground up in making a new strategy for small sites in London?

Sadiq Khan: Getting local communities involved in the development of their local area is central to the approach to growth set out in my London Plan and this includes our small sites strategy. The London Plan places a new emphasis on the importance of developing small sites to help meet London’s significant housing needs. To achieve this, the Small Sites Policy focuses on enabling communities to be at the forefront of their area’s development and provides a number of tools to ensure people are proactively engaged in their local borough’s plan‑making processes, helping to ensure change is truly community‑led. This includes the development of area‑wide design codes by boroughs and neighbourhood planning forums to support incremental development.
The Plan stipulates that local communities must be engaged from the outset in preparing these design codes, ensuring that those who are most impacted by development have a real say in shaping their area. To help meet the aims of our strategy and to help boroughs and communities practically bring forward small sites, we are developing London Plan guidance on small sites development and on these area‑wide design codes. Our approach to small sites is also about diversifying the market, opening up opportunities for small and medium‑sized builders, and aims to help create well‑designed custom build and community‑led housing projects, the biggest barrier to which is the lack of small sites.
We have also been enabling delivery on the ground through a number of programmes and interventions, including the £38million Community Housing Fund. This fund aims to increase the number of homes delivered by London’s community‑led housing sector, enabling Londoners to play a leading role in developing new social‑rented and other genuinely affordable homes that meet local needs. Approximately £20million of advance revenue and capital funding has been allocated so far through the fund, to support delivering 203 homes across 11 schemes. We are also supporting the community‑led housing London hub, which provides a one‑stop shop for community organisations requiring information, capacity‑building and technical support to get their community‑led housing projects off the ground.

Siân Berry: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. You have laid out there some good things you are doing, particularly in relation to individual sites. Now, I want to focus today on the borough by borough targets for small sites in the London Plan and how I do not think it is achievable without having a London-wide strategy, a project from you to support the boroughs. I think you have made it clear that you want the boroughs to do this, but even the reduced small sites target in the London Plan is not going to work without some more support for them.
The Planning Inspectors said this in their criticism of the small sites policy when they cut the targets. In the Inspectors’ report, they say that factors that may inhibit delivery include “the impact on borough resources in identifying and considering the number of sites required”, and they criticise the lack of detailed engagement with the boroughs in deciding on the small sites methodology.
I would like you to put some resources into helping boroughs make plans to find sites in a bottom‑up way. What plans do you have to do that, for finding small sites in a bottom‑up, strategic London-wide way?

Sadiq Khan: Can I just be clear, is the suggestion that City Hall finds the sites for the boroughs?

Siân Berry: It provides a method for boroughs to help find the quantum, the number of sites that we are looking for, and to find that in the right way, in a bottom‑up way.

Sadiq Khan: Right. We are giving funding to assist communities in relation to them finding support towards, for example, community housing funds. I have already explained in my answer the £38million we have for that particular scheme. The original sites targets that we had in the draft London Plan were reduced by the Inspector. We cannot go back to targets for boroughs. The London Plan is a strategy in relation to how we get more small sites being used. Separately, we are doing work with small builders to encourage the small builders to take up some of the small sites that are offered to avoid the usual suspects.

Siân Berry: If I can clarify a bit more maybe, I am aware of two boroughs whose small sites estimates proved more robust as they did full surveys of their borough and their land, but even these were very top‑down exercises, and I worry that we are starting to see that already with some of the small sites coming forwards. For example, residents in KilburnSquare were quite shocked when Brent Council started to build on their green space, cutting down mature trees. Southwark Council are planning to build on a football pitch in Bermondsey. Did they ask the local community before putting forward plans for this small site? No, they did not. Even your TfL grey sites, the carparks, are getting pushback from local people.
You and I have a good track record of constructive taking up of new ideas, for which I give you credit, and the project I would most like you to take up from my Manifesto is the idea of a London-wide People’s Land Commission, something that is really a mission for the whole city, involving people in bottom‑up small site identification. Now, it is MQT so I do not have time for the full pitch, but I think if I had a meeting with you, I could convince you this would solve a lot of your problems. Can I get a slot to talk to you about this specifically?

Sadiq Khan: Always happy, Chair, to talk to Assembly Member Berry.

Siân Berry: I will very much look forward to that meeting. The last time the two of us had a meeting was in 2019 so I think it is time we talked again, and I think I could convince you of this.

Sadiq Khan: That is my loss, not yours.

Siân Berry: It definitely is. Thank you very much, we will speak again.

Andrew Boff: I hate to stop the love‑in, really.

Sadiq Khan: Chair, you can join as well.

Andrew Boff: It would not then be a love‑in.

Gender-neutral toilets

Caroline Russell: Do you agree that it is an important public health and equalities issue that gender-neutral toilets in London are preserved and improved, alongside the provision of any new facilities?

Andrew Boff: Before I ask the clock to start on the next question, you have 26 seconds for the Mayor to reply and a follow‑up.

Sadiq Khan: I will give you a very short answer. Public toilets are a vital provision for everyone and increased provision across London is key to making sure all Londoners can move around with dignity.

Caroline Russell: Thank you. It is really important for London to be a trans, non‑binary and parent‑friendly city so I welcome your support for that.

Sadiq Khan: A good example, Chair, of us working closely together and a continuation of the love‑in that you are welcome to join, Chair, at any time.

London's Green Belt

Andrew Boff: Will you protect London’s Green Belt?

Sadiq Khan: The Green Belt serves multiple important functions for our city, mitigating the impacts of climate change, providing space for food growing, preventing flooding, providing important habitats for wildlife and allowing space for recreation and relaxation for Londoners. I am committed to preserving and enhancing it.
My London Plan clearly states that the Green Belt should be protected from inappropriate development. However, the National Planning Policy Framework does allow development on the Green Belt if very special circumstances can be demonstrated. The same applies to boroughs proposing to remove Green Belt designations in their local plans. The London Plan is clear that Green Belt boundaries should be changed only in exceptional circumstances. London’s Green Belt prevents urban sprawl, driving the reuse and intensification of previously developed land. Prioritising development of brownfield land is a key part of the approach the London Plan takes to meeting London’s substantial housing need. This ensures there is sufficient space for other essential land uses without encroaching on the Green Belt or other designated open spaces, including Metropolitan Open Land.
As well as setting out a strong policy position on protecting the Green Belt, we are also taking a robust approach to implementation, refusing development proposals that would cause harm and not supporting any inappropriate attempts to de-designate the Green Belt. For example, in 2018 GLA officers successfully defended my direction to refuse planning permission for a rail freight facility in the Green Belt, saving 54 hectares of open land from development.
I also want to make sure the Green Belt is enhanced for the benefit of Londoners. We have already supported the creation of two new woodlands in the Green Belt, creating 84 hectares of publicly accessible green space and contributing to the planting of 90,000 trees this year alone. We will be making more funding available this summer through my Green New Deal Fund to help address the climate and ecological emergencies. Rewilding and other landscape improvement projects that can provide improved, more inclusive access to green space will be eligible for funding. This will include projects on sites in the Green Belt that are in areas of high climate risk.

Andrew Boff: Do you expect Enfield’s Local Plan to align with the policies in the London Plan in terms of continued protection of London’s Green Belt?

Sadiq Khan: As you know, I was not happy with the draft Local Plan and I objected in relation to the draft plan having plans to remove the designation. They will respond to the points raised in the consultation and come forward with their latest plan. We will have to wait and look at that and respond. Then it goes to the Inspector. Based on what I have said, I would be surprised if they continue with plans to
de-designate; I did continue to express my unhappiness with that.

Andrew Boff: I am surprised at their plans to de-designate, as you say, but your Labour colleagues in Enfield have proposed building on some parts of the Green Belt. What message will you send them?

Sadiq Khan: I really do not want to get into Labour/Conservative. This is about something I feel strongly about for our city. The key thing is for me to make my views clear without fear or favour. My London Plan is quite clear. My Environment Strategy is quite clear. This is an area that we agree upon in relation to the importance of the Green Belt.
If it is the case that any council - and we are talking about Enfield now - has plans to de-designate the Green Belt for reasons that I do not agree with, I will not be scared to object. I would hope the Inspector would look at the London Plan and look at our policies and side with our objections, but you will be aware that an inspector can decide to go ahead with the council or the London Plan. This is a good example of me not caring whether the council is Labour or Conservative.

Andrew Boff: You will oppose any council coming forward that decides‑‑

Sadiq Khan: On a case-by-case basis. Can I reassure you, I will say this to leaders of councils who may be from my party. This is a good example of without fear or favour. These are really important policies. These are the lungs of our city. You would have to have, according to my policies, an exceptional reason to de-designate.

Andrew Boff: Thank you, MrMayor.

Affordable housing funds

Andrew Boff: Can you please confirm how and when the £535m unallocated funds from the 2016-23 affordable housing programme will be allocated and spent?

The Mayor: With nearly two years left to run, around 90% of the funding in the 2016-23 Affordable Homes Programme has been allocated. Remaining headroom in the programme will be allocated and spent in line with partner development plans and where proposals deliver within the timeframes set for the 2016-23 Affordable Homes Programme. My team continues to allocate funds to new schemes that meet the requirements for the programme through continuous market engagement.

Police officers who cycle

Caroline Pidgeon: What proportion of MPS officers have access to a Met bicycle? Has any assessment been undertaken as to whether there is an under representation of female police officers that use bicycles as part of their duties?

The Mayor: The Metropolitan Police Service has approximately 1,000 operational bikes and these are distributed across the Basic Command Units (BCUs). Safer Neighbourhood Teams have access to these bikes (and are the primary users of the bikes, although they may also be used by other units) and they are therefore fully available to female officers in those teams.

Recording Near Misses

Nicholas Rogers: Does TfLtake into accountnear misses in its road accident data? If so, what is the mechanism by which it does this? If not, why not?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) is absolutely committed to the Vision Zero objective of eliminating deaths and serious injuries from the transport network. Data and insights that allow the effective targeting of efforts will be critical to shaping the most effective interventions to achieve Vision Zero. Near-miss data is a potentially important indication of locations and behaviours that could represent a risk. Unfortunately, however, there is not currently a comprehensive source of data on near misses that take place on the road network. The national Stats19 road safety dataset collected by the police reports only on incidents that result in injury and therefore excludes near-misses.
Where near-miss information is available in specific circumstances, such as when a serious incident is reported by a bus-driver, an investigation will take place. However, there is no equivalent process for identifying near-misses involving other road users. TfL is aware of the value of near-miss information where it could potentially identify risks in advance of somebody being injured and is currently working on a number of pilot projects to investigate whether risks and near-miss information can be inferred from vehicle telematics systems.

Electric vehicles

Marina Ahmad: What work has been carried out by TfL to assess the safety aspects of the quietness of electric vehicles? How can we ensure that Londoners, especially those with hearing impairments, remain safe when crossing the road?

The Mayor: At slow speeds, Electric Vehicles (EVs) are quieter than their combustion-powered equivalents. This may have adverse implications for vulnerable pedestrians and other road users who might not hear an EV approaching. No one should be at risk of being killed or seriously injured on London’s roads, and that is why Transport for London is working to eliminate such tragedies as part of my Vision Zero commitment.
For several years, many EVs have been fitted with an Acoustic Vehicle Alert System (AVAS), which emits sound of varying frequency and volume to warn of direction and speed of approach. These noise generators typically operate at slow speed and when the vehicle is in reverse.
Since July 2019, European legislation (Regulation (EU) No 540/2014) has mandated sound generators on newly approved electric car models to ensure they produce an appropriate noise level at speeds below 20 kph (approximately 12.5 mph) and when reversing. From July this year, all new electric cars sold must have an AVAS.
All new Zero Emission buses areequipped with an AVAS to make vulnerable road users more aware of the presence of much quieter buses such as those electrically-powered. TfL’s AVAS system has been specifically designed for London’s buses so that the sound becomes louder where there is more background noise such as a busy shopping area, or quieter when vehicles pass through more open suburban neighbourhoods.The sound is also emitted when a bus is stationary so that visually impaired stakeholders know a bus is at a bus stop.

Wandsworth One Way System

Leonie Cooper: Can the Mayor update me on the situation with funding for the changes to the Wandsworth one-way system on the South Circular/Wandsworth High Street?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) continues to work with Wandsworth Council to develop the business case to secure Major Road Network (MRN) funding, which will fund a large proportion of the scheme. TfL remains committed to the scheme, subject to securing MRN funding and Wandsworth Council’s continued support.

Hammersmith Bridge (1)

Nicholas Rogers: What specific actions have you taken since the last Mayor’s Question Timeon 27th May on the issue of reopening Hammersmith Bridge?

The Mayor: The London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (LBHF), as the owner of Hammersmith Bridge, is responsible for determining its Case for Continued Safe Operation (CCSO). The borough is currently reviewing the CCSO to determine whether the bridge can be reopened on a limited basis for walking and cycling. Several studies and assessments are being done to help inform this review. Some of these are being undertaken by Transport for London (TfL) on behalf of the borough, including inspections of the chain tunnels which were completed during the week commencing 7 June. Detailed investigations of the chain knuckles are due to commence this week. LBHF’s review of the CCSO is expected before the end of July.
TfL has also developed plans for stabilising the bridge which would allow it to be safely and permanently reopened for walking, cycling and river traffic. TfL shared these plans with LBHF and the Department for Transport (DfT) some time ago and awaits a decision on next steps. Discussions are underway between TfL, LBHF and the DfT on the development of a Memorandum of Understanding, which will set out the roles and responsibilities of each of the parties and how the next stage of the required repairs will be funded.

E-scooter use in Brent and Harrow

Krupesh Hirani: With the introduction of e-scooters in 5 London boroughs, what is the Metropolitan Police Roads and Transport Policing Command (RTPC) doing to ensure the safety of pedestrians on London’s streets? Can you provide early data on collision and incident reports?

The Mayor: The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is working with Transport for London (TfL), participating London boroughs and the trial operators to ensure that riders of the rental e-scooters do use them in a safe and legal way. This includes rider training, communications and awareness raising campaigns, the use of no-go and go-slow zones, warnings, on-street teams identifying risky behaviour and warnings, as well as bans and fines for riders who do not stick to the rules. The use of privately-owned e-scooters on public roads (including pavements) is illegal and the MPS has been enforcing this in London with over 900 private e-scooters being seized this year. To see collision and incident data in relation to illegal private e-scooters please see the response to question 2021/2275.
As part of a wider monitoring and evaluation programme for the e scooter rental trial, operators Dott, Lime and TIER have to report on safety and incidents to TfL. Trial safety will also be monitored by the Department for Transport (DfT) via surveys throughout the course of the trial. TfL are currently agreeing a way forward on the approach to validate this data, including those on collisions and incidents, with all delivery partners, including, operators, London boroughs, London Councils, the MPS and DfT, with a view to periodically publishing some of the high level data during the trial period.

Replacement bus

Leonie Cooper: Could the Mayor ask TfL to look into a replacement bus service starting at Southfields station instead of Merton Road going to Wimbledon? Constituents have to walk down Replingham Road and it is very inconvenient given the continual work ongoing on the District line.

The Mayor: This rail replacement service has been looked into in some depth by Transport for London (TfL) to avoid inconveniencing customers and continues to be kept under review. Until recently, the TfL replacement buses did serve Southfields directly outside the station using Replingham Road.
Unfortunately, during a recent District line closure, the bus operator reported that parked cars and delivery trucks repeatedly made Replingham Road a bottleneck, causing heavy traffic in the area with delays of up to 20 minutes.
Therefore, TfL decided to route straight along the A218 Merton Road for future closures, to help prevent congestion, which was causing highly unreliable journeys for customers and unpredictable delays for the operator. As well as rail replacement bus services, there are also local bus routes that can be used for other journeys such as route 493, which connects Southfields with Wimbledon every 12 minutes during weekdays, and route 39, which takes customers from Southfields station to Putney Bridge every 8 minutes during the week.
TfL does therefore not intend to add another replacement bus route to serve Southfields station at this time.

Toilet facilities on the Transport for London network

Krupesh Hirani: What is the Mayor of London doing to improve public access to toilets, including on the Transport for London network?

The Mayor: To improve access to public toilets in London, my London Plan Policy ‘S6 Public Toilets’ requires proposals for large-scale commercial developments open to the public to provide and secure the future management of free publicly accessible toilets suitable for a range of users. My Good Growth investment is creating or refurbishing more than 250 toilet units, including more than 180 which are fully accessible in key locations across London. Furthermore, the Public London Charter includes publicly accessible toilets, including Changing Places toilets, as amenities desired under the ‘Public Welcome’ principle.
Transport for London (TfL) recognises that access to public toilets is important to many of its customers when travelling. TfL has removed charges from all toilets on the Tube network and is looking at options to enhance information available to customers about the location and opening hours of toilets, where applicable. It will be providing additional customer toilet facilities as part of the Northern Line Extension when this opens later in 2021.

Due Diligence Report in preparation for the transfer of the tram system to TfL

Neil Garratt: Following up on documentation TfL released in your delayed response to Question 2020/4635, please provide me with the "Due Diligence Report in preparation for the transfer of the tram system to TfL” that TfL provided to the RAIB on 24 November 2016.

The Mayor: Please see the additional documents provided in response to Mayor’s Question 2020/4635.

Social Distancing on the Tube (2)

Keith Prince: Do you recognise that if TfL has taken insufficient steps to ensure passengers have sufficient space to socially distance on London Underground trains, responsibility for that failing would ultimately rest with you as Chairman of the TfL Board?

The Mayor: I do not accept that Transport for London (TfL) has taken insufficient steps to ensure its customers can effectively socially distance. As set out in my answer to Mayor’s Question 2021/2346, TfL has introduced a range of measures on the Tube to support social distancing, in line with government guidance.

TfL - Financial Sustainability Plan

Nicholas Rogers: When will you publish a new plan, outlining a path for TfL to reach financial sustainability?

Sadiq Khan: TfL has worked magnificently to keep London moving during the past 15 months, but the pandemic has highlighted very clearly the problems with its financial model. It cannot be right that the capital’s transport network, which is vital in supporting the national recovery, is so reliant on fares revenue and so vulnerable to the kind of shock we have seen over the past year.
Before the pandemic, we made good progress in fixing the mess that had been left by the previous Mayor. TfL’s deficit had reduced by 71% and reserves increased by 13%. The latest funding and financing agreement with the Government provides core funding of £1.08billion from 31May to 11December [2021] and means TfL can continue to operate the services to support London’s recovery and progress planned improvements like the Elizabeth line, the Northern line extension and the extension of the London Overground to Barking Riverside.
The agreement requires TfL to achieve sustainability a year earlier than set out in its Financial Sustainability Plan. This means that by April2023 TfL would cover the costs of day-to-day operations, maintenance, renewals and financing. The agreement also requires TfL to find very substantial savings this financial year compared to the budget agreed in March [2021]. This is a challenge that TfL will be working through in the coming months.
The first step is for TfL to produce a revised budget for consideration by the TfL Board in July [2021]. That revised budget will constitute TfL’s latest financial plan and so there is no need - and indeed no requirement from the Government - to develop another separate Financial Sustainability Plan. The revised budget and the revised long-term capital plan, which is also now being updated, will then determine what funding TfL will need to lobby the Government for in the CSR this autumn.
In the meantime, TfL is working hard to rebuild revenue by enabling people to return to public transport safely. TfL’s commitment to operating safe, frequent, clean, well-managed and welcoming services is key to rebuilding ridership. It remains very clear that sustainable long-term funding support for TfL will be essential. Even the Government has acknowledged that London cannot be expected to meet all of its transport investment requirements alone.

Nicholas Rogers: Good morning, MrMayor. Thank you very much for your answer there. A number of options have been proposed to put TfL on the path to financial sustainability. I wonder if perhaps you can say what progress you have made on some of those options, for example, reforming TfL pensions.

Sadiq Khan: The Government has asked us to do a business plan about what we can do about pensions going forward. We are working closely with the Government and our trade unions there. It is something that is being looked at and, in due course, TfL will be responding to the Government. There is a timeline by which they have been asked to give the Government a response and we are working towards that.

Nicholas Rogers: How much work has been done so far? How much progress have you made?

Sadiq Khan: A lot. To give TfL credit, even before the issue of the pandemic, TfL was looking into the future of the pension scheme. Clearly, we need to do lots of work in relation to reassuring the Government. That work is ongoing.

Nicholas Rogers: Thank you. Another option that has been raised a number of times is commercial sponsorship on the Tube. What work has been done on that as part of financial sustainability?

Sadiq Khan: TfL’s advertising estate, which is an example of revenue, is one of the most successful in the world. Similarly, our property portfolio as well. However, you will appreciate that with the reduction in the footfall, if you are an advertiser, not unreasonably, you are less keen to advertise in an area less seen by customers. What we are trying to do at the same time as increasing commercial opportunities and commercial revenue - and sponsorship is one of them - is to increase footfall. Both are things we are working on at the same time.

Nicholas Rogers: Thank you, MrMayor.

Transport for London Settlement (2)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says, “Development of an implementation plan for accelerating TfL’s existing modernisation programme which would see the full £730m of recurring savings delivered by April 2023 as part of a declining cost base”. Please provide details of the current modernisation programme.

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL)’s existing Business Plan commits to cost savings of £730m over the period to 2024/25. Over £300m of this has been delivered with around £400m still to deliver.
Details around this plan were published when the 2021/22 Budget was approved by Board on 16 March. Please refer to slide 10 of the Board papers, which can be accessed through this link.
TfL is committed to working with its employees and trades union colleagues in the usual way as opportunities are identified and plans are developed.

TfL’s Extraordinary Funding and Financing Agreement

Elly Baker: Is the 1 June 2021 Extraordinary Funding and Financing Agreement between Transport for London and the Department for Transport a good deal for London?

Sadiq Khan: The 1June agreement with the Government is clearly not the deal that we wanted, and it presents a number of serious challenges for Transport for London (TfL) and for London. You would have seen, for example, that TfL’s credit rating was downgraded last week, with the lack of clarity from the Government on long-term funding being cited as a cause. This will make it harder to secure much-needed investment in London, but this deal is also the only deal that was on the table so I had to accept it to keep public transport in London moving.
I have been clear that my aim remains to secure a sustainable long-term funding deal for TfL, which can support London’s economic recovery as well as help to achieve the Government’s own aims of a national infrastructure-led recovery, a decarbonised United Kingdom (UK), and the levelling up of our economy. The pandemic has shown that TfL can no longer rely so heavily on fares revenue. The simple fact is that the loss of fares revenue due to the pandemic is the only reason TfL needs emergency funding to keep operating and the Government remains the only source of such funding for some time to come.
We knew these negotiations were going to be extremely tough, and they were. But we saw off the worst of the conditions the Government wanted to impose on London, which would have been equivalent to withdrawing one in five of London’s bus routes, hampering London’s recovery. I am hopeful that as Londoners continue to steadily return to the transport network and as TfL continues to find new ways to reduce costs and become even more efficient, the organisation will return to the level of financial sustainability it had achieved before the pandemic and go even further in the future.
This will not be easy. It will mean making some tough choices; however, TfL’s hard work in the coming months will allow it to continue to play a central role in our recovery and London’s future. Transformative projects like the Elizabeth line, the extension of the Northern line and the rebuilding of Bank station are forging ahead, as are projects to avoid a car-led recovery, improve air quality and encourage active and sustainable travel.

Elly Baker: Thank you, MrMayor. MrMayor, you may be aware that a fortnight ago the Assembly Labour Group produced a report, The TfL funding settlement: another short-term sticking plaster. In it we made several recommendations, the first of which said the Government should offer TfL an 18-month deal with no strings attached, similar to the deal train operating companies outside London received. Was that ever on the table? Did the Government ever offer you such a deal?

Sadiq Khan: No, it did not. One of the things that we asked for was parity of treatment. You mentioned how privatised train operating companies got the blank cheque for 18months; we asked for something similar. We did not mind the cheque not being blank, but a long-term deal or even a medium-term deal was clearly far better for TfL than the six-month ad hoc deals with draconian strings. We are hoping though that, with the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) this autumn, we will be able to get a decent deal for a decent length of time after that. We are going to work closely with the Department for Transport (DfT) in advance of the CSR to make sure we have the right arguments to present to Treasury.

Elly Baker: One of our other recommendations was that Londoners should have a say on any future deal, on the level of funding offered and the conditions attached. Would you support giving the public a say on that?

Sadiq Khan: I think they had their say on 6May [2021]. They wanted a Mayor of London standing up for our city rather than the pocket of the Government. That means making sure that we argue the case for London. It is very important for the Government to realise that a national recovery can only happen with a London recovery. When you speak to businesses across our city, that can only happen with TfL firing on all cylinders. But I am more than happy to have the Government listen to Londoners who will be crucial in our nations’ recovery.

Elly Baker: Thank you, MrMayor.

TfL Funding Deal and London’s economy

Marina Ahmad: What impact will the TfL funding deal have on London’s economy and London’s businesses?

The Mayor: Transport has always been a fundamental component of the functioning of cities and their economies - without successful transport there cannot be successful cities.
The funding agreement reached with Government on 1 June 2021 enables Transport for London (TfL) to maintain core transport services, which are crucial to supporting London’s businesses and its economic recovery. It is also important that the Government has explicitly committed to continuing to work with TfL on reaching a longer-term financial settlement.
London was responsible for 23 per cent of the UK’s total Gross Domestic Product in 2018 and was a net contributor of £38.9bn in taxes to HM Treasury. As TfL is critical to the success of London, it is also therefore critical to the success of the national economy and HM Treasury’s tax base.

Affordable Homes starts targets

Len Duvall: What progress has been made on establishing an annual target range for expected housing starts under the Affordable Homes Programme in each year from 2021-2026? What impact has Covid-19 had on the ability to set these targets?

The Mayor: My team is in the process of assessing bids for funding to the 2021-26 Affordable Homes Programme. The funding proposals will be reviewed in conjunction with government and delivery profiles will be determined thereafter. However, the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is already manifesting itself in housing providers’ lack of appetite to take forward new development at scale. This will make it very challenging to set annual targets, however my housing team will continue to undertake robust risk management of the affordable housing programme to ensure that delivery is maximised. I anticipate that we will be able to share annual targets with the Assembly in the Autumn.

Silvertown Road Tunnel engagement by Riverlinx

Zack Polanski: Could you obtain and provide a list of attendees from organisations, including educational establishments, companies and residents’ associations, at engagement events held by Riverlinx related to the Silvertown Road Tunnel?

The Mayor: Due to COVID-19 restrictions, Community Liaison Group events and other engagement events organised by Riverlinx have generally been held online. Attendees from the following organisations have attended:

Congestion Charge, Residents Discount in the North East Constituency (2)

Sem Moema: Can you provide details of how the changes made to the congestion charge during 2020-2021 have affected the way Londoners travel? What is the plan for the current congestion charge policy, which is due to end on 22nd June 2021?

The Mayor: Monitoring has highlighted that lower levels of traffic supported by the temporary Congestion Charge changes have facilitated a better experience for people walking, cycling and using buses in the Congestion Charging Zone.The temporary changes supported around 50 temporary Streetspace schemes in central London. These have encouraged more trips to be made by active modes, and also repurposed street space for other uses, such streateries in Soho and Charlotte Street, or wider footways to give people shopping more space for social distancing on Regent Street.
Low traffic has facilitated a cycling boom. 2020 saw one million more Santander Cycles hires than in 2019. Since the first lockdown, weekend cycle flows in the Congestion Charge Zone have consistently exceeded 2019 flows, with some weekends seeing numbers up by more than 200 per cent. Increased bus speeds have also supported those reliant on buses and made them a more competitive alternative to driving.
TfL’s 2021/22 budget does assume, for planning purposes only, that the temporary changes to the Congestion Charge are retained on the basis that they will still be required as an emergency response to the transport challenges arising from the pandemic. TfL is keeping the temporary changes under constant review, especially as we move through the Government’s roadmap for easing restrictions. I have asked them to bring proposals to me regarding what the best congestion charging arrangements would be to ensure a strong economic recovery in London – one that is environmentally sustainable and fair to all. I am expecting these proposals later this summer, and they would be subject to public consultation.

Toilets at TfL stations

Caroline Russell: Could you tell me how many public toilets will be opened at Transport for London (TfL) stations (including Crossrail) in the next three years, and provide details by station of the number and types of facility?

The Mayor: On the London Underground network, new accessible toilets with baby changing facilities will be available at Battersea station and Nine Elms station when they open later in 2021 as part of the Northern Line Extension. The Cannon Street entrance at Bank will have toilet facilities. Transport for London (TfL) is also working with the Changing Places Consortium to pilot a ‘hybrid’ facility at Colindale station, which will vary slightly from a standard Changing Places toilet to make it available and accessible to a wider group.
When completed, 34 of the 41 Elizabeth Line stations will have toilet facilities, with a further 7 stations having toilet provision in an adjacent building. Where toilet facilities exist within stations, at least one will be fully accessible.A new accessible toilet was opened at Manor Park earlier this year, and accessible toilets will be installed at West Drayton and Southall stations by the end of this year. Permanent toilets will also be delivered at Taplow and Hayes & Harlington stations by the end of this year.
London Overground and TfL Rail toilet facilities are already free of charge. On London Underground, all toilet facilities are now free, following the removal of the coin operated mechanisms at Cockfosters station earlier this year.
In total, TfL has around 100 stations on its network with toilet facilities, and these are published here: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/toilets-map.pdf
Please also see my response to Mayor’s Question 2021/2547.

Transport for London Settlement (3)

Elly Baker: The 1 June 2021 TfL Funding Settlement Letter says, “As recommended in the Mayor’s Independent Review, TfL will carry out a review of their pension scheme and reform options with the explicit aim of moving TfL’s Pension Fund into a financially sustainable position”. The Independent Review recommends “that a commission be established to undertake this review”. What plans, if any, do you have to set up an independent Commission to undertake this work?

The Mayor: The Government has made it a condition of the funding agreement that, in keeping with the recommendation of the Independent Review into Transport for London’s (TfL’s) funding published in December 2020, it expects TfL to review its pension scheme and identify reform options with the aim of putting TfL’s pension fund into a financially sustainable position. The Government has asked TfL to identify a list of reform options by 31 October 2021, to produce an interim report by 11 December 2021, and then produce a final report making recommendations by 31 March 2022.
TfL is now considering how best to conduct this review and what form it will take, including how various key stakeholders and interested parties can make representations should they wish to.

Companion Pass

Onkar Sahota: When you launched your re-election campaign in January 2020, you vowed to introduce a “companion pass” that would allow a relative, friend or carer to travel free on the Tube, bus and Transport for London rail network when with a disabled person. When will the companion pass be launched?

The Mayor: Please see response to Mayor’s Question 2021/2495.

Purley Way Master Plan

Neil Garratt: What are you doing from a transport perspective to support the Purley Way Master Plan?

Sadiq Khan: TfL has been working closely with Croydon Council on the draft Purley Way masterplan. This includes identifying transport improvements to support the delivery of 7,500 new homes and up to 2,200 new jobs, in line with the principles of good growth and healthy streets.
The masterplan seeks to transform the Purley Way corridor into a city street that fully integrates new development with important retail and employment areas and residential neighbourhoods. Placemaking principles have been established to strengthen distinct new centres, each with a clear purpose and character, which will complement Croydon metropolitan town centre, Purley district centre, the Beddington Lane industrial area and other places in nearby Sutton.
The transport improvements needed include walking and cycling infrastructure in the area to support sustainable travel and improve connectivity, enhancements to the public realm and sufficient bus, tram and rail capacity to accommodate predicted future demand. Carparking will also need to be limited to avoid generating new car journeys as far as possible. As with other parts of London, it is vital that we do not end up with a
car-led recovery from the pandemic, replacing one public health crisis with another. The masterplan offers a great opportunity to improve the A23 Purley Way corridor itself and make it easier, safer and more welcoming for people walking and cycling. An important part of this work is reviewing the plans for the Five Ways junction to ensure that they are appropriate. Reducing traffic in this area will be challenging, but it will be fundamental to the success of the masterplan.
The next step is to undertake strategic transport modelling to assess the infrastructure requirements in more detail and identify timing and potential phasing. Discussions with the Council are ongoing and the work is planned to start later in the summer. Detailed consideration of how the strategic traffic function of the Purley Way corridor can be fully aligned with the Healthy Streets Approach is also needed.

Neil Garratt: Thank you. As you say, it has 7,500 new homes. It has cross-party support. I believe even the Liberal Democrats support those particular new houses. It would mean 15,000 extra people living in that area and currently it is basically a car corridor of large box retailers and big carparks. The concern I have is that you have read some blurb from the masterplan about the aspirations. What I do not see is something tangible.
Can we have a commitment from you that it will not just be lots of people driving around there, as it is currently? If you have 15,000 extra people, we need some plan for how they are going to get around that maybe involves the tram, which is in the area, a modern railway station or more buses. You spoke about the plans over the summer. When will we see something tangible in terms of projects that might receive some funding?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, can I thank the Member for the points he has raised and the way he has raised them? I am more than happy to ask the Deputy Mayor [for Transport] to meet with you as summer begins.
Just to lay out the workstream with us and the Council, TfL is spending a lot of the summer working with the Council. I love the way you described it. We do not want ‘blurb’. We want tangible change for the better for that community. By the way, the air quality improvements are potentially huge if we can resolve the Purley Way corridor, which, as you said, is like a car corridor that causes problems and stuff.
Chair, with your permission, Heidi [Alexander, Deputy Mayor for Transport] and Neil could sit down and work together to see what we can do to get the Council, residents, businesses and TfL in the same space. In relation to the tram, TfL is concerned about whether the new tram proposed, rather than the improvements, is the right solution, but that is one of the things we can discuss with the Member.

Neil Garratt: That sounds very positive. Thank you very much. I look forward to that.

Congestion Charge, Residents Discount in the North East Constituency (1)

Sem Moema: What assessment has been made regarding the temporary removal of the congestion charge resident discount? Can you tell me when the residents discount will be reinstated? Many residents within my constituency feel they are being penalised due to the inflated rise in Congestion Charge and lack of discount available to them.

The Mayor: The residents’ discount continues to be available for those who met and continue to meet the residency requirements on or before 31 July 2020 and had applied for the discount by this date.
The decision to temporarily close the residents’ discount to new applicants was informed by an Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA), which included an assessment of the impact on residents (the full IIA is available here: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/appendices_1-4_1.pdf ). Having considered these impacts, I delayed the temporary closure of the residents’ discount from 22 June 2020 to 31 July 2020, to allow extra time for those who met the residency requirements to register for the discount.
TfL’s 2021/22 budget does assume, for planning purposes only, that the temporary changes to the Congestion Charge are retained on the basis that they will still be required as an emergency response to the transport challenges arising from the pandemic. TfL is keeping the temporary changes under constant review, especially as we move through the Government’s roadmap for easing restrictions. I have asked them to bring proposals to me regarding what the best congestion charging arrangements would be to ensure a strong economic recovery in London – one that is environmentally sustainable and fair to all. I am expecting these proposals later this summer, and they would be subject to public consultation.

VAWG and Online Safety (2)

Caroline Pidgeon: What work is MOPAC undertaking to review its commissioned support services to ensure they are equipped to meet the needs of victims of online offences, particularly children, given the increasing prevalence and concern over online child sexual abuse offences since the beginning of the COVID pandemic?

The Mayor: MOPAC has recently undertaken a Strategic Needs Assessment for Victims in London to gain an understanding of the victim profile, need and how well MOPAC’s commissioned services are equipped to respond to this. The findings are currently being refined but will underpin future commissioning plans and ongoing service management/development with provider agencies, ensuring services are aligned to victim need and demand in line with trends in victimisation, including those related to offences committed online.
MOPAC has worked with the NSPCC to ensure that any London resident contacting the helpline for the https://www.everyonesinvited.uk initiative is signposted towards appropriate and trusted specialised support services.
Staff at MOPAC’s London Victim and Witness Service provided by Victim Support receive specialist training around online harms and how to recognise and support victims of this type. Children and young people are signposted to the NSPCC, Childline Internet Watch Foundation and to UK Safer Internet Centre.

Transport & public health (2)

Tony Devenish: Can you detail TfL’s mechanisms for communicating this advice to commuters and those using London’s transport networks?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) has used its website, journey planning tool and its TfL Go app as key mechanisms for communicating advice to commuters. To raise awareness of commuter advice in advance of travel, TfL used channels such as radio, roadside posters, press advertising, customer emails, digital banners and social media.
Traditional forms of communication have also been used; staff at TfL’s Contact Centre have answered over one million calls from customers and responded to over 400,000 pieces of correspondence. Advice was also shared via posters and tannoy announcements in stations and on its bus network.
Advice has been shared through TfL’s stakeholders, including business and customer representative groups and these groups have been kept up-to date via regular meetings and cascading of key materials on how best to safely travel to work if working from home was not possible. A series of infographic posters were provided to reassure these groups on the measures TfL is taking to uphold hygiene, safety and cleanliness while its customers use the network. Topics covered include how TfL is keeping the network clean, how air circulates on buses and tube carriages and when there are quieter times to travel on public transport. Throughout the pandemic, TfL has used flexible communication channels, such as digital posters and digital banners, to be able to react quickly to the government’s guidance and the various changes to restrictions.
Please also see my response to MQ 2021/2447.

Zero Emission Buses (2)

Tony Devenish: Towhat percentage of the bus network does 500 zero emission buses equate?

The Mayor: This number equates to about 5.5 per cent of the total fleet of around 9,000 buses.

Transport & public health (1)

Tony Devenish: What steps are taken to ensure that advice regarding the use of public transport always reflects the most up-to-date public health information?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) has regularly updated the coronavirus advice on its website, adding and amending information as the government advice has changed due to lockdowns, tiering restrictions or the government’s roadmap out of lockdown. It has also added new information for customers about how it has been keeping the network clean, how the air circulates in vehicles, how customers can download or order a face covering exemption badge if they are exempt, how to find one of London’s major vaccination centres or when there are quieter times to travel.
TfL’s Government Relations team has continuously liaised with the Department for Transport on policy changes. It has shared any relevant information amongst customer communications teams to ensure accurate messaging across all its channels.
TfL has issued in excess of 200 million customer information emails during the pandemic to update customers about changes and has used a suite of marketing outputs including posters, social media posts, digital outdoor advertising, radio and YouTube adverts in line with the government guidance and advice.
Please also see my response to Mayor’s Question 2021/2448.

Hyde Park Corner Traffic Accidents

Tony Devenish: Please list all the accidents over the last two years at the crossing on Hyde Park corner at the entrance to Hyde Park, broken down by vehicle type.

The Mayor: In the location specified (Hyde Park Corner junction with Aspley Gate), there have been five personal injury collisions in the two years to the end of 2020, which are the most recent validated figures available from the police.
Date of collision
Severity of Injury
Victim Mode
In collision with
01/03/2019
Slight
Cyclist
Car
17/02/2020
Slight
Car Driver
Car
25/02/2020
Slight
Motorcyclist
Private Hire
07/07/2020
Slight
Horse Rider
Private Hire
30/07/2020
Slight
Pedestrian
Car
Details of personal injury collision information for the Greater London Area from 2005 can be found here: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/road-safety this includes a link to our road danger reduction dashboard and data.
Road traffic collision figures are reported via the police in accordance with Department for Transport (DfT) STATS20 instructions at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/230596/stats20-2011.pdf.

Queen's Gate Traffic Accidents

Tony Devenish: Broken down by month, how many traffic accidents have there been in Queen’s Gate over the last two years both in total and involving supercars?

The Mayor: At Queens Gate between Kensington Gore and Brompton Road there were 31 personal injury collisions in the two years to the end of 2020, the most recent validated figures available from the police, with eight resulting in serious injury and 23 in slight injury. Of these collisions, 23 involved a car driver, with six collisions resulting in serious injury and 17 in slight injury.
Road traffic collision figures are reported via the police in accordance with Department for Transport (DfT) STATS20 instructions at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/230596/stats20-2011.pdf. The DfT does not require the police to record the make or model of vehicles involved in collisions; ‘supercars’ are therefore included within the broader vehicle type category of ‘car’.
Personal injury collisions Queens Gate Kensington Gore to Brompton Road 2019-2020
2019
Serious
Slight
Total
Jan
3
3
Mar
2
2
Jun
3
3
Aug
1
2
3
Sep
2
2
Oct
2
2
Nov
1
1
Dec
1
1
2020
Jan
1
1
Feb
2
2
Mar
1
1
Apr
1
1
Jul
1
1
Aug
2
2
Sep
2
2
Dec
1
3
4
Grand Total
8
23
31

Safety of e-scooters

Caroline Russell: Privately owned e-scooters are currently prohibited on public UK roads and pavements. Simon Ovens from Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Roads and Transport Policing Command (RTPC) was quoted as calling privately owned e-scooters: “death traps” in the Evening Standard on 4 July 2021. Does Transport for London (TfL) have Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) data to back this up?

The Mayor: The safety record data of illegal e-scooter use is the only validated safety data that Transport for London currently has access to.
Since the fatal injury of one e-scooter user in 2019, there have been no further reported fatalities in London. There is no specific reporting category for e-scooters in the police Stats19 data collection form; they are part of the ‘other vehicles’ category.
Annual road safety data for 2020 shows a reduction in people killed or seriously injured for almost all modes compared to 2019. However, injuries to users of ‘other’ vehicles rose by 12 per cent, of which deaths and serious injuries (known as Killed and Seriously Injured) to e-scooter riders rose from 10 in 2019 to 56 in 2020. The 56 e-scooter KSI data from 2020 include zero deaths. This trend may be linked to increasing use of e-scooters during the lockdown [1]. E-scooter riders made up less than two per cent of the 3,070 people killed or seriously injured in 2020.
The rental e-scooter trial, which launched in London in June 2021, provides vehicles from operators Dott, Lime and Tier. The operator’s e-scooters must comply with a minimum vehicle specification set out by the Department for Transport, and TfL has also set out additional safety standards for the scooters being used in the London trial, including a lower maximum speed. The vehicles are considerably more robust than the most common e-scooters sold by major retailers to private individuals.
Chief Superintendent Simon Ovens was referring to the potential risk that privately-owned e-scooters pose on the roads. Privately owned e-scooters are illegal and uninsured for use on public roads. The MPS has serious concerns about the use of privately-owned e-scooters in London as these e-scooters do not have the same safety measures in place as the current London trial has. Enforcement against privately-owned scooters, ridden in public, will continue throughout the trial.
[1] https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/HFD/interim-results-financial-year-2021/14759814

Transport for London Settlement (4)

Elly Baker: The Independent Review recommends “A government guarantee on these [pension] liabilities would reduce TfL’s contributions to the scheme and save the public sector money, noting that this might require legislation”. What discussions, if any, have you had with the Government on them guaranteeing these liabilities?

The Mayor: As per my response to 2021/2478, the Government has asked us to identify a list of reform options by 31 October 2021, to produce an interim report by 11 December 2021 and then produce a final report making recommendations by 31 March 2022. Considerations around options and discussions with the Government will take place through this process.

Met Recruitment and Conduct

Caroline Pidgeon: Do you have confidence in the Metropolitan Police Service’s recruitment processes for police officers?

Sadiq Khan: It is vital that the public can have confidence in the integrity and professional standards of their police. Policing is a rewarding but extraordinarily challenging occupation. Our officers must be skilled professionals and embody the very highest of standards. The public expects and deserves no less. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is working hard to attract and recruit a diverse range of candidates with the aptitude and skills to police our global city. I want police officers to join the MPS out of a passion to serve their community and with the drive to perform an outstanding job.
To help achieve this, the MPS operates robust recruitment procedures that have been developed with the College of Policing. Potential candidates must meet academic standards and complete a variety of online and in-person assessments, including interviews, roleplays and situational judgement tests. Candidates are also subject to rigorous security vetting, the guidelines of which are established nationally for all police forces to operate within. Both the Commissioner [of the Police of the Metropolis] and I expect the very best of officers and the highest levels of conduct and personal integrity.
Unfortunately, we know in some cases officers fall short of the standards we expect of them. The Commissioner is committed to rooting out and addressing any failure in professional standards and recognises that it is only with the support of the public that the police can prevent and solve crime. The MPS has assured me that the responsibility to stand up for the values of integrity, compassion and courage, is made clear to every officer and member of staff. This is reinforced through training and during promotion courses. The MPS Department of Professional Standards also proactively engages with groups across the MPS to reinforce the principles officers must uphold.
This is a really important issue, and neither the Commissioner nor I take the professional standards of the MPS for granted. We are both aware that this is something that has to be worked at every day to maintain the confidence of the public. I will continue to challenge and support the MPS to develop recruitment processes to ensure London has skilled, professional officers who properly support the communities they serve.

Caroline Pidgeon: Lovely, thank you for your answer. The MPS is filled with committed and dedicated officers. But I am concerned that in recent months we have seen increasing reports of serious misconduct. We have seen officers involved in such things as taking pictures of murder victims, attempting to engage in sexual activity with a child, stealing drug money, assault and rape. Of course, we have also had the tragic events surrounding SarahEverard and the report into the DanielMorgan case. Do you share my concern over this pattern of incidents, and what are you doing to understand why we are seeing such serious misconduct within the MPS?

Sadiq Khan: Not only do I share those concerns, but I am sure I speak for the senior management of the MPS in saying that they share those concerns as well. I have talked about some of the steps the police are taking in relation to recruitment, but also the steps they are taking when officers join the police service. It is really important when failings are revealed that action is taken. The MPS does take the failings you have highlighted very seriously and is addressing them.

Caroline Pidgeon: I understand there will always be cases of officers breaking the law or acting improperly, a very small number I am sure. But the scale and the seriousness of some of the more recent reports and cases has given me huge cause for concern. It will undoubtedly, as you mentioned earlier, be contributing to the fall we see in public confidence in the MPS. Will you work with the MPS to review the application and recruitment process and the companies that are used, to assure yourself that it is sufficiently robust?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, I have checked the issue of how police officers are vetted in relation to the vetting code of practice; in relation to the approved professional practice, which is a national vetting process; in relation to the MPS having their own vetting unit and their own vetting board. There are always improvements that can be made and what I am willing to do, Chair, is to contact the Assembly Member to let her know all the steps we are taking, have taken, and will continue to take going forward. Just to reassure you, the MPS is not happy to mark its own homework; it is also very keen to work with the College of Policing, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) and, indeed, the Home Secretary is also looking into these issues with us. All of us want to make sure that the right checks and balances take place, because I think the core of your question is about trust and confidence.

Caroline Pidgeon: Exactly.

Sadiq Khan: Also your appetite, like mine, is to make sure more Londoners have more trust and confidence. The police get that as well.

Caroline Pidgeon: Thank you. I look forward to receiving that. We have also seen the
well-publicised case of a young MPS recruit being sacked and facing criminal proceedings due to his membership of a prohibited neo-Nazi group. I think this raises serious concerns around the checks and the vetting undertaken within the MPS into new recruits. The Daniel Morgan [Independent Panel] Report recommends better vetting of officers and that the MPS should implement a requirement for police officers to register their membership of any organisation, including the Freemasons. Considering the large number of new officers currently being recruited, will you support the implementation of these recommendations in the MPS?

Sadiq Khan: Firstly, for the sake of convenience, it is important to remind colleagues that it was the police themselves who discovered this officer had lied about his membership of the proscribed organisation. The police are looking at what more work they can do to proactively catch people who lie when they apply to join the police service. They will carry on doing that. In saying that, I know it is a source of concern to those who head the counter-terrorism unit. The Police Regulations are quite clear,
“A member of a police force shall at all times abstain from any activity which is likely to interfere with the impartial discharge of his duties or which is likely to give rise to the impression amongst members of the public that it may so interfere”.
That goes, of course, towards the issue raised about Freemasons as well.
In relation to the Daniel Morgan Panel, which did an exhaustive piece of work over a number of years, we are looking very carefully at the 1,200-page report. The Home Secretary has asked Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to look into the report and has asked the MPS for a response. We are also waiting for a response from the MPS in relation to that.
We will make this one point in relation to Morgan: it was a horrible murder of DanielMorgan, and our sympathies go to the family. The main criticisms of the police in the Morgan case go back a number of years; the police service in 1987 was very different to the police service in 2021.

Caroline Pidgeon: I look forward to picking up these recommendations going forward and I hope you will support them. Thank you, MrMayor.

IA 16767 - Trams Management of Operational Risk Audit

Keith Prince: In my 19 November 2020 Question 2020/4101 request, I asked for the following information: “Starting from 1 September 2016, please provide me with all documentation (initiating letters, terms of reference, emails, handwritten notes, audit drafts) associated with or referring to IA 16767, including all correspondence relating to its cancellation.”
In your 29 November 2020 response you stated “I have asked Transport for London to respond to this request and an updated answer will be uploaded once available.” Nearly 7 months have passed since your response. How can you explain this long delay? When will the data I requested be made available?

The Mayor: Please see the attached emails and documents relating to audit IA 16 767.
As advised in my answer to Mayor’s Question 2020/4625, there was a discussion about IA 16 767 with Transport for London (TfL) Legal on 28 November 2016. A note of the outcome was recorded in the Audit database but no other note of that meeting has been located.
TfL is not aware of any relevant “handwritten notes” but confirming that would require an extensive level of searching in archives and offices which would not be practical. Some documents which are legally privileged have not been provided. Where possible partial documents have been provided with non-privileged material.

The Mayor: 1979 - PDF Portfolio 16767 documents FINALC part 2.1.pdf


  1979 - PDF Portfolio 16767 documents FINALC part 2.2.pdf


  1979 - PDF Portfolio 16767 documents FINALC part 2.3.pdf

London Plan and Community Engagement

Sakina Sheikh: How does your London Plan ensure Londoners have a say in regeneration plans for the capital, and ensure they have a role in shaping their neighbourhood?

Sadiq Khan: My London Plan sets out a new tone, an expectation for communities’ role in shaping the policies that are important to them. It opens with Objective GG1 [Good Growth], requiring those involved in planning and development to encourage early and inclusive engagement with local communities in the development of proposals, policies and area-based strategies.
My London Plan also requires engagement and collaboration with communities to inform the development of planning frameworks that guide development in Opportunity Areas, capable of accommodating significant numbers of new homes and jobs. These should start at an early stage and continue throughout the formulation. The Plan requires this high-quality engagement for all of London’s strategic and local areas for regeneration. Through the Plan’s design policy framework, we have moved from the numbers-focused density matrix in previous plans to a design-led approach to make the best use of sites. This uses tools such as character studies and local design codes to ensure development enhances the local area. The Plan and emerging guidance are clear that this work must be informed by meaningful engagement and collaboration with local communities. The new approach to tall buildings clearly aligns with this, empowering local authorities, in discussion with their communities, to establish the location and maximum heights of tall buildings at the plan-making stage.
Where housing estates are proposed for redevelopment, my London Plan requires engagement with residents to establish the objectives of the estate regeneration before any options are considered, implementing my Good Practice Guide to Estate Regeneration. This includes a requirement for balance wherever City Hall funding is to be used to support demolition and rebuild as the chosen option. The Plan also strongly focuses on inclusive placemaking, incorporating a range of homes, tenures and land uses to make sure development and change benefit all Londoners.
I am confident that the policies in the Plan, guided by the Good Growth objectives, will ensure that communities have a stronger voice in regeneration plans across London and that the growth delivered is inclusive growth.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you very much, MrMayor. I could not agree more that inclusive placemaking and engagement of our communities should be absolutely central to our plans going forward, and I look forward to continuing to work with you to make sure that happens.
We were discussing regeneration and, absolutely, regeneration can give London the keys to unlock its potential, but it is also important to highlight there are examples of regeneration being termed ‘gentrification’, where, for instance, developments have led to poor doors, which embeds a sense of inequality in our city and social segregation by design.
The question I want to follow up with you on is about a recent example. Many of us saw headlines with the swimming pool suspended between two tower blocks in Nine Elms, Battersea. Those in the building who had bought into shared ownership of homes for up to £800,000 could not access that swimming pool. What it did is it gave Londoners an insight into what that social segregation can look like. Of course, we know that there are much uglier manifestations of that kind of social segregation, such as social tenants being forced to use back-door entrances by bins.
My question to you is: how can your London Plan mitigate against aggressive regeneration such as this and avoid social segregation?

Sadiq Khan: Yes, it is a really important issue. What we are trying to do with the London Plan and the other strategies we have is to make sure that we are helping to build communities. What we are talking about is not growth for growth’s sake but good growth, which means we want to make sure that places are inclusive and high-quality as well. What we have done is to learn from the mistakes made previously and not chase crude targets.
There is a separate issue, though, which is illustrated by the example you have given of the housing model in relation to cross-subsidy. That is one of the things that does need looking into. The only way you are going to get around the problem of cross-subsidy is to get more support from central government to be able to build genuinely affordable homes. We are working closely with key partners to make sure we can have communities that help all of us to benefit from living in this great city rather than just some of us.

Sakina Sheikh: Absolutely. Thank you for that answer. Just to finish up, whilst we are discussing the Nine Elms example, I really want to encourage Londoners to go away and look at this case as what I believe to be a wider example of the Government’s mismanagement of the planning system but also the attacks on genuinely affordable homes.
I wanted to ask on that point you have made about lessons that we can learn in this example of using Section106 money and how we balance its use, whether it is used for Tube stations or, again, the desperately needed affordable housing in the area.

Sadiq Khan: That is a good example, whether it is Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), whether it is the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (MCIL) or whether it is Section106, of the gains to the community by developments. I am really concerned that we are seeing a situation where we could lose that going forward by, for example, permitted development rights, which takes away the opportunity for a local council, which knows the community best, to negotiate with a developer to get the best deal for the community. It has led to some real improvements in communities because there are negotiations between councils and developers. The Government should think very carefully about its plans for permitted development.

Sakina Sheikh: Thank you, MrMayor. Thank you, Chair.

Tulse Hill Gyratory

Marina Ahmad: Can you provide an update on progress into improvements around the Tulse Hill Gyratory, which seemed to have stalled due to Covid-19?

The Mayor: Tulse Hill was paused in spring 2020 due to the pandemic. TfL staff working on the project were re-allocated to other parts of the business to support the response to the pandemic.
The project has recently restarted and is in the early stages of feasibility work to define the different options which would address the range of improvements needed at this location. One of these options includes proposals being championed by the local community. TfL anticipate completion of the options feasibility stage in spring 2022.

Riverlinx (3)

Elly Baker: How much of the waste material produced as a result of the Silvertown Tunnel is being transported via the river? Is this as much as was anticipated when Riverlinx submitted their bid for the project?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL), and subsequently Riverlinx, are required to maximise the use of the river for the transport of materials under the terms of the Development Consent Order (DCO) for the scheme. Over the lifetime of the project, TfL has committed to transfer all “suitable excavated materials” and 55 per cent of all materials by river.
Construction of the scheme is still at a relatively early stage, and so the quantity of materials being transported is relatively small. It had been anticipated that use of the river would not be feasible untilthe facilities for the maintunnelling works had been established, but Riverlinx is currently significantly ahead of schedule in this regard, having sent off via barge 44per centof non-tunnelling waste generated in February, March and April 2021. This is amounts to almost 11,000 tonnes of wasteand is equivalent toremoving 629 lorries from the road.

British Transport Police CCTV storage

Marina Ahmad: For what period of time does British Transport Police retain CCTV images recorded at London’s transport hubs?

The Mayor: If CCTV footage is required by the British Transport Police (BTP) then this will be for a policing purpose only. The length of time footage is retained is managed in line with Management of Police Information (MOPI) which is used by all police forces nationally.
Any CCTV that is not requested by the BTP is overwritten in line with the CCTV retention policy of the respective transport provider or operator.

Unaudited, Unapproved “Operator-Led” Initiatives

Keith Prince: Given the inconvenience imposed on Londoners by the recent Unite the Union strikes over Remote SignOnat Metroline, can you identify any other unapproved, unaudited “operator-led initiatives” that impact upon London Bus Driver working conditions of which TfL is aware?

The Mayor: I am pleased that Unite the Union called off recent strike action following a decision by Metroline to suspend the introduction of any new remote sign on facilities until at least the end of 2022.
The Quality Incentive Contracts (QICs) used by Transport for London (TfL) are designed to allow bus operators to innovate and enhance the way bus services are delivered with safety and quality in mind. They are outcome-based and can involve minimum standards being set in areas where TfL’s objectives go above and beyond legal requirements.
A number of changes have been introduced over the years, including recording of safety checks electronically and improved internal communications. None of these need to be approved by TfL, nor are they directly audited, as they are the responsibility of the operating companies and their staff. It is a strength of the system that it enables innovation.
I am absolutely committed to ensuring bus driving remains an attractive career in London and I will continue to promote fair and safe working practices for bus drivers in London. This includes schemes like the London Bus Drivers’ Professional Wage, the Bus Drivers’ Retention Scheme and the Licence for London, as well as helping to fund facilities like toilets and rest areas on the most needed bus routes.

Active travel within dynamic fare pricing

Siân Berry: Thank you for your answer to my question 2021/1467. Will you consider including support for active travel, such as by including cycle hire charges in fare caps, within your plans for dynamic fare?

The Mayor: I have instructed Transport for London to explore whether some form of dynamic pricing could be compatible with ensuring that the fares structure that applies on its services is simple, coherent and encourages use of public transport to avoid a car-led recovery.
Separately, I recently announced that Santander has extended its sponsorship of TfL’s cycle hire scheme until 2025. This vital investment will allow TfL to modernise the scheme, including introducing 500 new e-bikes by next summer. TfL is exploring options for pricing and no decisions have yet been made.

London Disability Employment Taskforce

Hina Bokhari: In 2018 the Social Market Foundation and the Trust for London recommended that you should constitute and lead a London Disability Employment Taskforce. What progress has been made on this since then?

Sadiq Khan: I am fully committed to supporting disabled Londoners to find and progress in work through the London Recovery Programme. As part of the London Recovery Programme the Good Work for All Londoners mission is delivering programmes that will help focus attention on promoting labour market equality for disabled Londoners. For example, the mission is developing a ‘no wrong door’ approach to ensure groups, including disabled Londoners, get the right employment support at the right time. This work is being guided by a task and finish group involving members with specific expertise on disability employment.
I have also helped establish a Joint Employment Working Group with the DWP and London Councils to better coordinate skills and employment programmes for Londoners most in need of support, including disabled Londoners. I am grateful to members of the GLA’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Advisory Group, who bring expertise and lived experience of disability. These members have helped the Good Work mission understand how to place inclusion at the heart of the Good Work for All Fund, but I am absolutely determined to explore every avenue available so this month the London Recovery Board agreed to set up a dedicated subgroup to address structural inequality through the Recovery Programme. The scope of this group’s work is currently being finalised, but I fully anticipate that the labour market inequalities experienced by disabled Londoners will be within scope.
As I do what I can at City Hall to support disabled Londoners into employment, I am also reaching out to the Government to play its part. I hope the long‑awaited Disability Strategy which the Government has promised to publish this summer will be ambitious in identifying actions to narrow the disability employment gap. It is critical that this work seeks to address the barriers that disabled people experience in the labour market as well as delivering fit‑for‑purpose social care and welfare benefit systems that allow disabled people to live independently and participate in the labour market.

Hina Bokhari: Thank you, Mr Mayor, for your answer. This is obviously a subject that I think is a concern for many Members here in the Assembly. It has been three years since the Social Market Foundation and Trust for London recommended that you set up a Disability Employment Taskforce, and two years since the London Assembly Economy Committee recommended the same. London needs a targeted and focused task group on getting Londoners with disabilities into work. It is clear that including disabled Londoners in a general employment programme has not worked, yet that is all you are doing, more of the same. I agree that we need skills for all Londoners. Will you now agree clearly that there is a need for a specialised and targeted intervention to get Londoners with disabilities into work?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, I am sorry that Tony Devenish[AM] stole Hina Bokhari’s thunder, but the problem with that is she failed to listen to the answer I gave to the Member, who asked a very good question in relation to how we can work together. The answer I gave is that we have only now set up the group doing the work on the Recovery Programme, so I find it hard to accept criticisms of the work done by the group when it has only just been set up. I am more than happy to arrange, Chair, for one of the officers to brief the Member about the work the group is doing.

Hina Bokhari: I am pleased that we have cross‑party support here. Recently I met the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and their London Revival Plan was also saying that we need to make sure that employers get guidance and support. I would like to know whether you are going to be ambitious enough to set a really clear target in this term to increase disability employment in the capital and give us some facts and figures and set some dates here now.

Sadiq Khan: Sure. Again, Chair, one of the problems when you read a question you have written in advance, when you have not heard the answer, is that you sometimes repeat the question. The answer I gave to a similar question, again asked by Tony Devenish [AM], was that it is very difficult to set targets in relation to an issue like this when we are really concerned about a return to the mass unemployment in the 2020s that we saw in the 1980s. I can set a target for saying I would like to have X number of disabled Londoners in work, but it is meaningless if we have, this summer, this autumn, next year, mass unemployment.
The key focus in the short term is to protect the jobs we have, which will help disabled Londoners, those who are working; to support the creation of new jobs, which will help disabled Londoners if we can get disabled Londoners to work in these jobs, which is what the allocated budget is doing; and, for those who lose their jobs, to get them back into work as soon as possible. I set out ‑ and I am happy to read it again ‑ in answer to Tony Devenish’s question some of the work I am doing in relation to adult education, work we are doing with the DWP, collegiately with central government, and the work the Recovery Programme is doing. As part of the Recovery Programme’s work there is now a subgroup looking at issues in relation to structural inequalities and that includes, of course, the issue of disabled Londoners, who are suffering in relation to lack of opportunities, in relation to lack of the right skills, and in relation to not fulfilling their potential with the right jobs, starting from school, which is why we are improving careers advice with the Careers Hub, but also the work we are doing into the Enterprise Adviser Network, to get more and more people going into schools to inspire children who are disabled to be ambitious in relation to what they can achieve.

Hina Bokhari: Great. Thank you very much for your answer, Mayor.

Negotiated Stopping

Onkar Sahota: In 2018, you provided funding to conduct research to support the development of a proposal for introducing negotiated stopping in London. I understand that now this research has been concluded, the GLA was considering the recommendations in the report and the possible use of negotiated stopping in London, following success in Leeds. Can you tell me whether you will be adopting any of these recommendations?

The Mayor: I support the negotiated stopping approach, not only because it is a humane response to settlements, but also given the positive housing and health outcomes it can yield for Gypsy and Traveller communities. The report from London Gypsies and Travellers (LGT) strongly makes this point and recommends a negotiated stopping protocol on GLA land, which my team is in the process of implementing. The pressures on my teams’ work programme arising from the challenges of the pandemic have translated into a delay in this work. However, my team is working to implement the protocol by the end of the year.
My team is also conducting a London-wide accommodation needs assessments for Gypsies and Travellers, in line with London Plan Policy H14. This needs assessment will inform borough Local Plans.
We will continue to work in partnership with Gypsies and Travellers, and representative organisations, in the implementation of the recommendations from the report.

Disabled Londoners (4)

Sem Moema: What impact, if any, will the TfL funding deal have on bus provision; and what measures will you put in place to ensure the impact on disabled Londoners of any potential reductions in the frequency of buses is mitigated?

The Mayor: One of the conditions of the Government’s funding agreement with Transport for London (TfL) is that demand numbers for buses are reviewed in July and September 2021.
I recognise that the bus network plays a critical role in supporting more local journeys and providing connectivity to areas the rail network doesn’t reach, along with being a sustainable and affordable alternative to car journeys. TfL’s Financial Sustainability Plan outlined that changing demand means there is scope for an overall four per cent reduction in bus mileage, phased over several years to 2024/25. However, TfL has been clear that any significant cuts to service levels would be counter-productive, especially at a time when we need to attract people back to public transport, boost London’s economy and avoid a car-led recovery from the pandemic.
TfL continuously reviews the bus network to ensure services reflect changing demand and deliver value for money, and will continue to engage with key stakeholders, the London boroughs and disability representative groups as it develops service changes. Any structural changes to bus routes would also be subject to public consultation and an equality impact assessment.

Bus service review delay

Siân Berry: The Transport for London (TfL) funding deal requires you to review bus services by 19 July 2021. Cutting bus services before we have data from term-time demand risks services Londoners have avoided due to Government advice being wrongly removed. Will you press Government to let you pause this review until there is better data on bus demand in the autumn?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) fully intends to undertake a review of bus services by 19 July and again in September as required by the recent funding agreement with central government which covers the period to 11 December 2021. This will build on work TfL carried out for its Financial Sustainability Plan.
I recognise the risks around undertaking a review before Step 4 of the Government Roadmap has taken place and before TfL has data on the autumn return to work and school. TfL will reflect this uncertainty in the narrative of the bus review and will set out when it expects demand to have stabilised sufficiently to undertake long term service planning decision.

Traffic monitoring for the Silvertown Road Tunnel

Siân Berry: The Ernst and Young audit of the Silvertown Road Tunnel says that an average of 91,000 daily trips use the Blackwall Tunnel. Would any increase in traffic above this level be considered by you to be a worsening of traffic conditions as defined by schedule 2 of The Silvertown Tunnel Order 2018?

The Mayor: The Silvertown Tunnel is expected to lead to a significant overall improvement in road network performance and traffic conditions in east and south-east London.
Several factors must be considered when judging changes in traffic conditions including traffic flows, queuing, journey times and journey time reliability.
Under the Development Consent Order, Transport for London (TfL) is required to share its assessment of the impacts of the scheme and whether any mitigation measures are required with affected highway authorities and members of the Silvertown Tunnel Implementation Group (STIG). Further details of the approach to this assessment will be shared in due course. The papers for STIG are published on TfL’s website here: https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-projects/silvertown-tunnel-implementation-group

Remote Sign On

Keith Prince: In your response to Questions 2020/1960, 2021/1961, and 2021/1962 you’ve confirmed that Remote Sign-On was an “operator-led initiative” that’s been in place on London Bus Routes since 2005 and no documentation exists for it everhavingbeen assessed or approved by TfL for its safety implications (or any other issues) for drivers. Given TfL’s 26 March 2021 Decision to impose a moratorium on the roll-out of Remote SignOnonMetroline’s operations and your recognition that the issue is “complicated”, do you accept that TfL’s failure to approve and/or conduct any analysis of Remote Sign On’s implications is an institutional failure, which in my view,borderson negligence?

The Mayor: No. All bus operators run their businesses with slightly different working practices and have health and safety forums for staff to discuss their concerns.
As operators employ their drivers, not Transport for London (TfL), TfL cannot instruct them how to use their staff, but it can and does oversee the wider health and safety of the bus network.
As I have mentioned in previous answers, there was no TfL decision to impose a moratorium on the roll out of remote sign-on. One of the operators, Metroline, agreed with Unite the Union that it will not be introducing any new remote sign on facilities until at least the end of 2022. As you know, TfL has taken the decision to gain a better understanding of the potential benefits and risks for everyone by commissioning independent research into this matter. My team will carefully consider the outcome of the independent research when it becomes available later this year as we are keen to ensure appropriate safeguards are in place for the good of staff and customers alike.

Congestion Charge Resident Discount Schemes

Anne Clarke: When do you believe it is likely that resident discount schemes in the congestion zone will be re-introduced?

The Mayor: The residents’ discount continues to be available for those whomet andcontinue to meet the residency requirements on or before 31 July 2020 and had applied for the discount by this date.
Transport for London’s (TfL’s) 2021/22 budget assumes, for planning purposes only, that the temporary changes to the Congestion Charge are retained on the basis that they will still be required as an emergency response to the transport challenges arising from the pandemic. TfL is keeping the temporary changes under constant review, especially as we move through the Government’s roadmap for easing restrictions.
I have also asked TfL to consider what Congestion Charge arrangements would be needed to ensure a strong economic recovery in London – one that is environmentally sustainable and fair to all – and that helps to achieve the long-term objectives of my Transport Strategy to reduce car use in central London and increase the number of people walking, cycling and using public transport. I am expecting these proposals later this summer. They would be subject to a full public and stakeholder consultation, and I will consider all representations before deciding whether or not to confirm them (with or without modifications).

World Leading’ Bus Safety Standard: Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) installation

Keith Prince: Inyourresponse to Question 2021/1987 you state that “343 buses now have AVAS [Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS), which is around four per cent of the total fleet.” As you know, TfL announced AVAS as part of its ‘World Leading’ Bus Safety Standard on 16 October 2018: based on the current rate of AVAS installation, can we really expect all of London’s buses to have AVAS installed by 2096? Can you assure me that this key goal of TfL’s ‘world leading’ Bus Safety Standard will be achieved earlier than the eve of next century?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) expects to have Acoustic Vehicle Alerting Systems (AVAS) rolled out across its entire bus fleet no later than 2034 – just over 14 years from the time the first vehicles appeared on the capital’s streets with AVAS. It is committed to bringing this timeframe forward if it is financially and technically feasible to help with my Vision Zero objectives.
As buses tend to have an average working life in London of 12-14 years, requiring new technology like this to be fitted to all new buses is is a proven and affordable way of bringing it to London’s bus fleet. The rate of fleet renewal can vary, however, as there are many dependencies such as existing route contract agreements with bus operators, the current age profile of vehicles and future policies on fleet renewal. One thing in favour of faster renewal, however, is that AVAS is a mandatory requirement on new quiet-running buses, including the rising numbers of zero-emission vehicles entering the fleet.

World Leading' Bus Safety Programme: Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) installation

Keith Prince: In your response to Question 2021/1987, you stated that “19 per cent of the total fleet have Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA)”. As you know,TfL announced the completion of ISA Trials on 16 March 2016: based on the current rate of ISA installation (less than 5% per year), I estimate that every TfL Bus will have ISA installed sometime after 2041. Can you assure me that this goal of TfL’s ‘world leading’ Bus Safety Programme announced 1 February 2016 will be achieved earlier than the 2040s?

The Mayor: Transport for London (TfL) expects to have Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) rolled out across its entire bus fleet not later than 2032 –14 years from the time it first committed to adopting this on new buses in 2018. Requiring this technology to be fitted to all new buses is a proven and financially efficient way of bringing in new technology, as buses tend to have an average working life in the capital of 12-14 years. TfL is also looking at accelerating this timeframe if this is financially and technically possible, to support my Vision Zero objectives. The rate of fleet renewal will vary each year as there are many dependencies, including existing route contract agreements with bus operators, the current age profile of vehicles and future policies on fleet renewal.

Silvertown Road Tunnel scrutiny

Zack Polanski: Do you feel that the Silvertown Road Tunnel has had enough public and democratic scrutiny?

Sadiq Khan: The Silvertown Tunnel has been one of the most heavily scrutinised projects in the history of the mayoralty, and rightly so. All in all, it has been consulted on in one form or another on ten separate occasions. It was first proposed in the previous Mayor’s Transport Strategy and also his London Plan, which were consulted on separately in 2009. TfL then held three separate consultations: two on a package of river crossings in East London, which included proposals for the Silvertown Tunnel in 2012 and 2013; then one on the specific proposal for the Silvertown Tunnel in 2014. All these consultations helped TfL develop its proposals with the benefit of feedback from the public and other stakeholders.
Statutory consultation on the Silvertown Tunnel scheme was then held in October and November 2015. Following that consultation, TfL applied to the [then] Secretary of State [for Transport] for the Development Consent Order. This process involved a six-month examination during which key issues were raised and examined in detail. All the documents and recordings of the hearings remain available for Assembly Members and anyone else to see. The Planning Inspectorate was satisfied with TfL’s work and recommended the scheme for approval. The Secretary of State agreed and granted the Development Consent Order.
My own Transport Strategy, my London Plan and London Environment Strategy all included the proposal and were each consulted on separately in my first term as Mayor. TfL has also held extensive discussions with stakeholder groups outside of these consultations, including the affected boroughs, businesses, residents associations and other groups. The scheme has also been reviewed by auditors Ernst & Young, the report of which is in the public domain, and by the TfL board, most notably again when its Programmes and Investment Committee granted the approvals to enter into the agreement with RiverLinx. This looked at the whole case for the scheme and was supported by assurance within TfL, an external expert, and the Independent Investment Programme Advisory Group. Ongoing scrutiny by the boroughs and the Greater London Authority (GLA) comes via the Silvertown Tunnel Implementation Group and reports, meeting papers and decisions are all also available online.
As a result of this extensive consultation and engagement and my own review of the project, the scheme is very different to the one originally envisaged, with better public transport, walking and cycling provision, concessions and discounts for local people, support for local businesses and stronger environmental controls for construction. We have long needed a new river crossing in that part of London and I am confident we have the right scheme for Londoners.

Zack Polanski: MrMayor, last month I promised that I would push you further and faster when I believe there are gaps in your plans for the climate emergency. This tunnel is a pretty huge gap. Londoners are rightly very concerned about it and I think more will be as awareness grows. I do not want to ask you today about the merits of the tunnel, I want to ask you about the process. We can talk about the merits another time when you have decided to pause and review.
You gave me an extensive timeline there and you said that it has been consulted on in one form or another. Can I confirm my understanding that the last time there was a consultation on this, which involved the public, was the statutory consultation in 2015 opened under the previous Mayor, which was over half a decade ago?

Sadiq Khan: No.

Zack Polanski: When was the public last involved?

Sadiq Khan: They have been involved on three more recent occasions at least. One was my Transport Strategy, which included details of the Silvertown Tunnel. Second was my Environment Strategy, which included the details. Third was my London Plan. Separately, there have been extensive consultations with key stakeholders, including with residents’ groups, including --

Zack Polanski: Sorry to interrupt you, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: You cannot suppress and interrupt when I am giving an answer. This is how it works; you ask the question and I give you the answer. Sometimes you do not like it and we will have a discussion about it.

Zack Polanski: Those packages involved a walking and cycling bridge, two new railway lines and a ferry crossing, and all of those have been cancelled from those consultations. All we are left with is this motorway tunnel and Londoners are furious. On local representation, three Members of Parliament (MPs) plus the directly elected Mayor of Newham all disagree with this and wanted a comprehensive review, which was not delivered in any of those extra consultations. Opposition to this is growing by the day. How loud does this opposition need to be for you to pause, reflect and speak to those Labour MPs? These are your own colleagues, MrMayor.

Sadiq Khan: The other example of huge consultation I did not mention was the Mayoral elections where the two main candidates - and the second candidate got far more votes than the candidate who came third - both were in favour of the Silvertown Tunnel. On every occasion where the Green candidate had the chance to speak, and there were many debates, she raised the issue of the Silvertown Tunnel. Another example of the response from Londoners that you claim to care about was the overwhelming return of votes for both the Conservative candidate and the Labour candidate. We can talk about the various occasions we have consulted Londoners over the last number of years, not least the last five years while I have been Mayor, and the previous --

Zack Polanski: How many times did you bring it up proactively, MrMayor?

Sadiq Khan: -- four years, being the second term of the previous Mayor of London. What we have done since I was elected Mayor is to improve the scheme. For example, the most unreliable‑‑

Zack Polanski: Can I go back to the question. Are you proud of this tunnel, MrMayor? How many times did you bring it up?

Andrew Boff: AssemblyMemberPolanski, you must allow the Mayor to answer the question.

Zack Polanski: They are quite long answers, Chair.

Andrew Boff: Perhaps the Mayor can answer concisely.

Sadiq Khan: The Conservative candidate and the Labour candidate did far better than the Green candidate.

Zack Polanski: But the Green candidate mentioned the Silvertown Tunnel proactively and that was agreed with. I do not think you mentioned this tunnel once unless it was defensively. Why do you not listen to these Londoners and pause and reflect? Will you even meet the campaigners? They have not been met since 2019 by HeidiAlexander [Deputy Mayor for Transport] for about 40 minutes, and there were five of them in the room. My final question, will you accept or decline an invitation with local residents who want to meet you to talk about this?

Sadiq Khan: Chair, the way it works, as you know as somebody who is an experienced Assembly Member, you do not get to frame the answer when you ask the question. I have been quite clear in the answer I gave to the question asked by the new Assembly Member, about the copious amounts of consultation both the previous Mayor and myself have done over the last number of years, the last eight years in fact, there have been regular consultations. We have taken on board many of the issues raised by Londoners, which is why the scheme that is now being constructed is far better than the original scheme envisaged in 2009. I am keen to make sure we continue to listen to those Londoners, which is why we are having, although it is not --

Zack Polanski: Chair, I note the Mayor has not accepted the invitation and I am out of time, so no further questions, thank you.

Andrew Boff: MrMayor, you are answering another question. The Assembly Member specifically asked you one question about whether or not you would meet with residents about the Silvertown Tunnel.

Sadiq Khan: The Deputy Mayor and I regularly meet with residents in that part of London, including the MPs that the Member seems to care quite passionately about, and the councils as well. I will continue to meet with representatives from the community, including the MPs and leaders.